Questions on Eschew Material Feat and Still Spell. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Questions on Eschew Material Feat and Still Spell. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Gatecrasher
03-02-07, 04:02 AM I have been searching the internet and the Wizard's site for the past couple of hours trying to find the answer to my question. I will quote the pertinent information so you don't have to dig through your own book and I would appreciate it you could answer my question or at the very least, post your thoughts.

Eschew Materials pg.94 of PHB (Player's Handbook) v.3.5

"Eschew Materials [General]
You can cast spells without relying on material components.
Benefit: You can cast any spell that has a material component costing less than 1gp or less without needing that component. (The casting of the spell still provokes attacks of opportunity as normal). If the spell requires a material component that costs more than 1gp, you must have the material component at hand to cast the spell, just as normal."

Spell Components pg 174 of PHB v.3.5
"Material (M): A magical component is one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible. Don't bother to keep track of material components with negligible cost. Assume you have all you need as long as you have your spell component pouch.

Focus (F): A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused. As with material components, the cost for a focus is negligible unless a price is given. Assume that focus components of negligible cost are in your spell components pouch."

Statement#1: It would appear that a Focus component is simply a material component that is not consumed when a spell is cast.

Statement#2: Focus components are kept in the spell pouch just as material components are and negiligible cost components are not tracked.

Statement#3: The intent behind the feat Eschew Materials is to allow a caster to use spells without relying upon a spell pouch, so long as the material component is negligible in cost.

Statement#4: Unfortunately, Focus components, while similar in all aspects to a Material components with the exception that they are not consumed when a spell is cast, ARE listed seperately in the Player's Handbook, which leads to some confusion and the following question.

Question#1: Does the feat Eschew Materials allow a character to cast a spell, such as True Strike, without the negligible cost Focus component?

Question#2: IF a character is required to have a negligible cost Focus component to cast a spell such as True Strike, does the component have to be in hand, or can it be hanging from the neck?

Question#3: IF a character has both Eschew Materials and the Metamagic feat Still Spell, can that character cast a spell, such as True Strike which requires a negligible cost Focus component, while both of his hands are full (such as when he is holding a sword and shield)?

Thank you for your response.
Bedevere
03-02-07, 04:17 AM A focus is NOT a material component. It is a focus.

Given that a few spells require a focus to be merely on your person, such as (from memory) contingency requires the item to be on you, if the contingency is to take effect, I'd say a focus is not required to be in hand. After all, the example of True strike. Most casters are going to be casting true strike for ranged attacks. A lot of these require two hands. It makes little sense if one hand therefore is going to be occupied, thus making ranged attacks difficult at best...
Bopple
03-02-07, 04:24 AM As Bedevere said, a focus is not a material component.
And Statement#3 is only partially true.
For example, while you are grappled, you need the material components in your hand, even if you have a spellcomponent pouch.
AntiDjinn
03-02-07, 04:25 AM Material components and material foci are two different things and whether or not they can go into pouches matters not at all.

In any case, a material focus is often integral to the effect of the spell. Look at Whirling Blade: The slashing weapon is the focus of the spell, if you throwing this spell and trying to eschew the focus then what are you accomplishing? Look at Magic Vestiment; the normal set of clothing is the focus, if you eschew this focus then the emperor will have neither clothes nor an AC bonus. Ditto for Magic Weapon; eschew the focus and what are you putting the bonus on?
Merestil Haye
03-02-07, 04:36 AM Question#1: Does the feat Eschew Materials allow a character to cast a spell, such as True Strike, without the negligible cost Focus component?Like Sirr Bedevere said, material components are not focus components. Eschew Materials does away the material component.

Question#2: IF a character is required to have a negligible cost Focus component to cast a spell such as True Strike, does the component have to be in hand, or can it be hanging from the neck?I usually don't worry about it so long as the caster can see or touch the focus during casting. That's just me though.

I lik Sir Bedevere's reasoning, although I'm not 100% certain that his example is wholly applicable; I'd say for Contingency you need the focus in hand (or visible) while casting, and thereafter need to carry the statuette on you.

Question#3: IF a character has both Eschew Materials and the Metamagic feat Still Spell, can that character cast a spell, such as True Strike which requires a negligible cost Focus component, while both of his hands are full (such as when he is holding a sword and shield)?You might want to reread the spell.

True Strike has no somatic component. It's utterly unaffected by the Still Spell feat. You can cast it with hands full anyway (which also suggests an answer to your question 2. Just have the focus hanging off your belt in full view or something).
Merestil Haye
03-02-07, 04:40 AM For example, while you are grappled, you need the material components in your hand, even if you have a spellcomponent pouch.If you have Eschew Materials you do not need negligible material components at all. You certainly don't need them in hand.

Statement 3 is perfectly correct. The intent behind the feat is to allow a caster to function without any need for material components of negligible value.
Gatecrasher
03-02-07, 04:51 AM Thanks also to Merestil Haye's clarifications, I was typing this post while he was replying.

Thank you for the responses so far. Antjinn especially put things into perspective with his examples of other spells. It seems clear now that Eschew Materials does not have any effect on Focus components.

I'm still not sure about the other 2 questions though. If I were playing a home game, I could simply discuss this with the GM and if the official rule is unclear, a house rule could always be made for clarification. Unfortunately, I do not currently participate in any home campaigns and my only current option to play Dungeons and Dragons is through RPGA at local conventions. I am trying to understand the rules before I create my next character, which will be a melee oriented sorcerer who does not use a spell pouch.

Most of the spells I have chosen or plan on choosing, don't have a material spell component listed, such as Magic Missle, Shield, and Blindness, but True Strike is the exception, which requires a Focus, but not a Material component. This seems like a very important spell to have, especially at higher levels, since a Sorcerer's BAB (Base Attack Bonus) is very low. I was hoping that Eschew Materials would help me with my character concept, but as it is now, it seems like a waste of a feat.

Thanks again for your responses.
Bopple
03-02-07, 04:54 AM Statement 3 is perfectly correct. The intent behind the feat is to allow a caster to function without any need for material components of negligible value.
No, it's not exactly identical.
I did not say you need spell component in your hand, when you have Eschew Material.
I meant need for material components != need for spell pouch.
risner
03-02-07, 12:51 PM Statement#1: It would appear that a Focus component is simply a material component

Question#1: Does the feat Eschew Materials ... without the negligible cost Focus component?

Question#2: does the component have to be in hand, or can it be hanging from the neck?

Statement #1 is false.

Question #1 is no.

Question #2 is yes and no. You need the Focus in hand to cast the spell just like a material component. DM call if the 2 or 3 spells that are V, S, M, F/DF require both hands to use the M and F at the same time or if you can combine the M and F in one hand.

Question #3 is yes, and it is in the FAQ (p12)
Gatecrasher
03-02-07, 09:43 PM risner, thank you for you response.

Statement#1 is not and never can be false. I intentionally worded the statement to reflect my subjective perspective on the situation by adding the word "appear." Had I attempted to make a statement of fact, then your answer would have been accurate.

Thank you for answering Question#2. I suspect that your answer is correct, but do you have any documenation to support your answer or is it merely your opinion?

Thank you for answering Question#3. However, your answer would appear to contradict your answer to Question #2. How is it possible to cast True Strike with both hands full? Did you not just say that a Focus had to be in the hand when casting the spell? Does the Metamagic feat Still Spell somehow allow for an exception that rule?

Furthermore, I read the FAQ at the top of this forum and I saw no information that relates to my questions. The FAQ at the top of this forum is only 9 pages long, there is no page 12. Is there another FAQ to which you are refering? Please clarify your answer.

Thanks again.
Merestil Haye
03-03-07, 04:44 AM Furthermore, I read the FAQ at the top of this forum and I saw no information that relates to my questions. The FAQ at the top of this forum is only 9 pages long, there is no page 12. Is there another FAQ to which you are refering? Please clarify your answer.Risner is almost certainly referring to the FAQ document that Wizards of the Coast maintain that is freely available from their website.

Go here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a) and download it for yourself. (Requires Acrobat Reader).
Sildatorak
03-03-07, 04:31 PM By the RAW, eschew materials does nothing for focus components. In my campaign I have house ruled that it negates the need for focus components that do not play a part in the spell effect (and are of negligible cost, of course). For example, it negates the need of a bit of fleece for silent image, but not the need for a gem with which to trap the soul. Bad example because of the money...it wouldn't get rid of the staff for spellstaff.
Willie the Duck
03-03-07, 07:09 PM Risner is almost certainly referring to the FAQ document that Wizards of the Coast maintain that is freely available from their website.

Go here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a) and download it for yourself. (Requires Acrobat Reader).

And it is presented horribly (it answers a question that appears to be duskblade specific). You need a free hand to use your focus to cast your spell. Presumably because you are using it as a "focus" of your magical intent Makes the most sense with items that you ensorcell, like the clothes in magic vestment. Note that you only need the hand free during the instant that you are casting the spell, so you can weild your 2 handed weapon, letting go with one hand long enough to cast the spell, and reup your grip on the weapon. This is why clerics and gishs use two handed weapon, or a one handed weapon and a light shield or buckler (or some kind of hands free weapon, like armor spikes or claw bracers). Every peice of character art shows clerics with a heavy shield and mace/warhammer, not realizing that he'd have to drop one or the other every time he wants to cast a spell.
risner
03-03-07, 09:40 PM Question#2. I suspect that your answer is correct, but do you have any documenation to support your answer or is it merely your opinion?

Question#3. How is it possible to cast True Strike with both hands full? Did you not just say that a Focus had to be in the hand when casting the spell? Does the Metamagic feat Still Spell somehow allow for an exception that rule?

#2 = PHB p156 "Cast a Spell"

#3 = I goofed. I answered the opposite of what you asked. You must have a free hand to use (M) or (F) spells. If you have a two handed weapon, you can do that by free action to one hand, casting, then go back to two hands on the weapon. Same for one handed and light shield. No luck on your heavy shield without dropping the weapon.
The FAQ question I mentioned was this answer "The duskblade’s armored mage class feature."
Sildatorak
03-04-07, 01:16 AM Makes the most sense with items that you ensorcell, like the clothes in magic vestment.Isn't magic vestment just DF? I thought the clothes were a target rather than a focus.
Willie the Duck
03-04-07, 05:46 PM If you say so. I didn't look. My point is that the peice of fleece for silent image (pull the wool over their eyes! OMG! Gygax, that's so funny I forgot to laugh:bored: ) doesn't really thematically need to be touched, but you'd better have to touch that blade you need for whirling blade.
Dheran
03-04-07, 06:59 PM risner's done a pretty good job of answering the OP's questions, so I'll just add the basic rule citation:
To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any). Here's the online Webster's for "manipulate":Manipulate
Verb
2. Hold something in one's hands and move it.Some spells have so many requirements that I can't see casting them without two hands free. Example:Freedom of Movement
Abjuration
Components: V, S, M, DF
Range: Personal or touch
Target: You or creature touched
...
Material Component
A leather thong, bound around the arm or a similar appendage.
risner
03-05-07, 08:44 AM Here's the online Webster's for "manipulate":Some spells have so many requirements that I can't see casting them without two hands free.

I have always wondered about that. Do you need two hands or can you overload the M and DF or F in the same hand? I don't believe it is answered anywhere, so I think it is a DM call.

I may be too liberal in this regard, but I allow overloading the hand, so you only require one hand for both.
Willie the Duck
03-05-07, 06:17 PM Another one is the glass rod and catskin for lightning bolt. definately comes from a time when they expected only straight casters to be casting (and drawing/stowing weapons being actions of indeterminate time).

I guess for me, it says that you have to manipulate them, not that you have to manipulate them at the same instant within a round. Perhaps people who have freedom of movement walk around with a thong tied around their arm, and just have to touch it or snap it or something. If we start requiring some spells to have two hands free, we have to start looking at every spell and deciding exactly what you are doing with each component (are you still eating the spider for spiderclimb, what's the statue for in stoneskin?).
Dheran
03-06-07, 05:05 AM For Freedom of Movement you'd probably need to use your teeth to tie the leather thong around your own arm. I guess you could do the same for a willing target, but it certainly would be easier using both of your hands instead. I think Willie's got a better two-hands-required example with Lightning Bolt. I wouldn't want to use my mouth for that spell!

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Gatecrasher 03-02-07, 04:02 AM	I have been searching the internet and the Wizard's site for the past couple of hours trying to find the answer to my question. I will quote the pertinent information so you don't have to dig through your own book and I would appreciate it you could answer my question or at the very least, post your thoughts. Eschew Materials pg.94 of PHB (Player's Handbook) v.3.5 "Eschew Materials [General] You can cast spells without relying on material components. Benefit: You can cast any spell that has a material component costing less than 1gp or less without needing that component. (The casting of the spell still provokes attacks of opportunity as normal). If the spell requires a material component that costs more than 1gp, you must have the material component at hand to cast the spell, just as normal." Spell Components pg 174 of PHB v.3.5 "Material (M): A magical component is one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible. Don't bother to keep track of material components with negligible cost. Assume you have all you need as long as you have your spell component pouch. Focus (F): A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused. As with material components, the cost for a focus is negligible unless a price is given. Assume that focus components of negligible cost are in your spell components pouch." Statement#1: It would appear that a Focus component is simply a material component that is not consumed when a spell is cast. Statement#2: Focus components are kept in the spell pouch just as material components are and negiligible cost components are not tracked. Statement#3: The intent behind the feat Eschew Materials is to allow a caster to use spells without relying upon a spell pouch, so long as the material component is negligible in cost. Statement#4: Unfortunately, Focus components, while similar in all aspects to a Material components with the exception that they are not consumed when a spell is cast, ARE listed seperately in the Player's Handbook, which leads to some confusion and the following question. Question#1: Does the feat Eschew Materials allow a character to cast a spell, such as True Strike, without the negligible cost Focus component? Question#2: IF a character is required to have a negligible cost Focus component to cast a spell such as True Strike, does the component have to be in hand, or can it be hanging from the neck? Question#3: IF a character has both Eschew Materials and the Metamagic feat Still Spell, can that character cast a spell, such as True Strike which requires a negligible cost Focus component, while both of his hands are full (such as when he is holding a sword and shield)? Thank you for your response.
Bedevere 03-02-07, 04:17 AM	A focus is NOT a material component. It is a focus. Given that a few spells require a focus to be merely on your person, such as (from memory) contingency requires the item to be on you, if the contingency is to take effect, I'd say a focus is not required to be in hand. After all, the example of True strike. Most casters are going to be casting true strike for ranged attacks. A lot of these require two hands. It makes little sense if one hand therefore is going to be occupied, thus making ranged attacks difficult at best...
Bopple 03-02-07, 04:24 AM	As Bedevere said, a focus is not a material component. And Statement#3 is only partially true. For example, while you are grappled, you need the material components in your hand, even if you have a spellcomponent pouch.
AntiDjinn 03-02-07, 04:25 AM	Material components and material foci are two different things and whether or not they can go into pouches matters not at all. In any case, a material focus is often integral to the effect of the spell. Look at Whirling Blade: The slashing weapon is the focus of the spell, if you throwing this spell and trying to eschew the focus then what are you accomplishing? Look at Magic Vestiment; the normal set of clothing is the focus, if you eschew this focus then the emperor will have neither clothes nor an AC bonus. Ditto for Magic Weapon; eschew the focus and what are you putting the bonus on?
Merestil Haye 03-02-07, 04:36 AM	Question#1: Does the feat Eschew Materials allow a character to cast a spell, such as True Strike, without the negligible cost Focus component?Like Sirr Bedevere said, material components are not focus components. Eschew Materials does away the material component. Question#2: IF a character is required to have a negligible cost Focus component to cast a spell such as True Strike, does the component have to be in hand, or can it be hanging from the neck?I usually don't worry about it so long as the caster can see or touch the focus during casting. That's just me though. I lik Sir Bedevere's reasoning, although I'm not 100% certain that his example is wholly applicable; I'd say for Contingency you need the focus in hand (or visible) while casting, and thereafter need to carry the statuette on you. Question#3: IF a character has both Eschew Materials and the Metamagic feat Still Spell, can that character cast a spell, such as True Strike which requires a negligible cost Focus component, while both of his hands are full (such as when he is holding a sword and shield)?You might want to reread the spell. True Strike has no somatic component. It's utterly unaffected by the Still Spell feat. You can cast it with hands full anyway (which also suggests an answer to your question 2. Just have the focus hanging off your belt in full view or something).
Merestil Haye 03-02-07, 04:40 AM	For example, while you are grappled, you need the material components in your hand, even if you have a spellcomponent pouch.If you have Eschew Materials you do not need negligible material components at all. You certainly don't need them in hand. Statement 3 is perfectly correct. The intent behind the feat is to allow a caster to function without any need for material components of negligible value.
Gatecrasher 03-02-07, 04:51 AM	Thanks also to Merestil Haye's clarifications, I was typing this post while he was replying. Thank you for the responses so far. Antjinn especially put things into perspective with his examples of other spells. It seems clear now that Eschew Materials does not have any effect on Focus components. I'm still not sure about the other 2 questions though. If I were playing a home game, I could simply discuss this with the GM and if the official rule is unclear, a house rule could always be made for clarification. Unfortunately, I do not currently participate in any home campaigns and my only current option to play Dungeons and Dragons is through RPGA at local conventions. I am trying to understand the rules before I create my next character, which will be a melee oriented sorcerer who does not use a spell pouch. Most of the spells I have chosen or plan on choosing, don't have a material spell component listed, such as Magic Missle, Shield, and Blindness, but True Strike is the exception, which requires a Focus, but not a Material component. This seems like a very important spell to have, especially at higher levels, since a Sorcerer's BAB (Base Attack Bonus) is very low. I was hoping that Eschew Materials would help me with my character concept, but as it is now, it seems like a waste of a feat. Thanks again for your responses.
Bopple 03-02-07, 04:54 AM	Statement 3 is perfectly correct. The intent behind the feat is to allow a caster to function without any need for material components of negligible value. No, it's not exactly identical. I did not say you need spell component in your hand, when you have Eschew Material. I meant need for material components != need for spell pouch.
risner 03-02-07, 12:51 PM	Statement#1: It would appear that a Focus component is simply a material component Question#1: Does the feat Eschew Materials ... without the negligible cost Focus component? Question#2: does the component have to be in hand, or can it be hanging from the neck? Statement #1 is false. Question #1 is no. Question #2 is yes and no. You need the Focus in hand to cast the spell just like a material component. DM call if the 2 or 3 spells that are V, S, M, F/DF require both hands to use the M and F at the same time or if you can combine the M and F in one hand. Question #3 is yes, and it is in the FAQ (p12)
Gatecrasher 03-02-07, 09:43 PM	risner, thank you for you response. Statement#1 is not and never can be false. I intentionally worded the statement to reflect my subjective perspective on the situation by adding the word "appear." Had I attempted to make a statement of fact, then your answer would have been accurate. Thank you for answering Question#2. I suspect that your answer is correct, but do you have any documenation to support your answer or is it merely your opinion? Thank you for answering Question#3. However, your answer would appear to contradict your answer to Question #2. How is it possible to cast True Strike with both hands full? Did you not just say that a Focus had to be in the hand when casting the spell? Does the Metamagic feat Still Spell somehow allow for an exception that rule? Furthermore, I read the FAQ at the top of this forum and I saw no information that relates to my questions. The FAQ at the top of this forum is only 9 pages long, there is no page 12. Is there another FAQ to which you are refering? Please clarify your answer. Thanks again.
Merestil Haye 03-03-07, 04:44 AM	Furthermore, I read the FAQ at the top of this forum and I saw no information that relates to my questions. The FAQ at the top of this forum is only 9 pages long, there is no page 12. Is there another FAQ to which you are refering? Please clarify your answer.Risner is almost certainly referring to the FAQ document that Wizards of the Coast maintain that is freely available from their website. Go here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a) and download it for yourself. (Requires Acrobat Reader).
Sildatorak 03-03-07, 04:31 PM	By the RAW, eschew materials does nothing for focus components. In my campaign I have house ruled that it negates the need for focus components that do not play a part in the spell effect (and are of negligible cost, of course). For example, it negates the need of a bit of fleece for silent image, but not the need for a gem with which to trap the soul. Bad example because of the money...it wouldn't get rid of the staff for spellstaff.
Willie the Duck 03-03-07, 07:09 PM	Risner is almost certainly referring to the FAQ document that Wizards of the Coast maintain that is freely available from their website. Go here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a) and download it for yourself. (Requires Acrobat Reader). And it is presented horribly (it answers a question that appears to be duskblade specific). You need a free hand to use your focus to cast your spell. Presumably because you are using it as a "focus" of your magical intent Makes the most sense with items that you ensorcell, like the clothes in magic vestment. Note that you only need the hand free during the instant that you are casting the spell, so you can weild your 2 handed weapon, letting go with one hand long enough to cast the spell, and reup your grip on the weapon. This is why clerics and gishs use two handed weapon, or a one handed weapon and a light shield or buckler (or some kind of hands free weapon, like armor spikes or claw bracers). Every peice of character art shows clerics with a heavy shield and mace/warhammer, not realizing that he'd have to drop one or the other every time he wants to cast a spell.
risner 03-03-07, 09:40 PM	Question#2. I suspect that your answer is correct, but do you have any documenation to support your answer or is it merely your opinion? Question#3. How is it possible to cast True Strike with both hands full? Did you not just say that a Focus had to be in the hand when casting the spell? Does the Metamagic feat Still Spell somehow allow for an exception that rule? #2 = PHB p156 "Cast a Spell" #3 = I goofed. I answered the opposite of what you asked. You must have a free hand to use (M) or (F) spells. If you have a two handed weapon, you can do that by free action to one hand, casting, then go back to two hands on the weapon. Same for one handed and light shield. No luck on your heavy shield without dropping the weapon. The FAQ question I mentioned was this answer "The duskblade’s armored mage class feature."
Sildatorak 03-04-07, 01:16 AM	Makes the most sense with items that you ensorcell, like the clothes in magic vestment.Isn't magic vestment just DF? I thought the clothes were a target rather than a focus.
Willie the Duck 03-04-07, 05:46 PM	If you say so. I didn't look. My point is that the peice of fleece for silent image (pull the wool over their eyes! OMG! Gygax, that's so funny I forgot to laugh:bored: ) doesn't really thematically need to be touched, but you'd better have to touch that blade you need for whirling blade.
Dheran 03-04-07, 06:59 PM	risner's done a pretty good job of answering the OP's questions, so I'll just add the basic rule citation: To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any). Here's the online Webster's for "manipulate":Manipulate Verb 2. Hold something in one's hands and move it.Some spells have so many requirements that I can't see casting them without two hands free. Example:Freedom of Movement Abjuration Components: V, S, M, DF Range: Personal or touch Target: You or creature touched ... Material Component A leather thong, bound around the arm or a similar appendage.
risner 03-05-07, 08:44 AM	Here's the online Webster's for "manipulate":Some spells have so many requirements that I can't see casting them without two hands free. I have always wondered about that. Do you need two hands or can you overload the M and DF or F in the same hand? I don't believe it is answered anywhere, so I think it is a DM call. I may be too liberal in this regard, but I allow overloading the hand, so you only require one hand for both.
Willie the Duck 03-05-07, 06:17 PM	Another one is the glass rod and catskin for lightning bolt. definately comes from a time when they expected only straight casters to be casting (and drawing/stowing weapons being actions of indeterminate time). I guess for me, it says that you have to manipulate them, not that you have to manipulate them at the same instant within a round. Perhaps people who have freedom of movement walk around with a thong tied around their arm, and just have to touch it or snap it or something. If we start requiring some spells to have two hands free, we have to start looking at every spell and deciding exactly what you are doing with each component (are you still eating the spider for spiderclimb, what's the statue for in stoneskin?).
Dheran 03-06-07, 05:05 AM	For Freedom of Movement you'd probably need to use your teeth to tie the leather thong around your own arm. I guess you could do the same for a willing target, but it certainly would be easier using both of your hands instead. I think Willie's got a better two-hands-required example with Lightning Bolt. I wouldn't want to use my mouth for that spell!