Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 posineg Nov 25, 2014 8:20:56	Simply: could a player who lost his tongue become a spell caster? or Could a character who took a vow of silence become a cleric?
#2 mellored Nov 25, 2014 8:43:54	There's nothing about verbal components that require a tounge. So... ask your DM.   I would allow it.  The bonus of getting to cast spells quitely countered by the roleplaying penatly.
#3 1eejit Nov 25, 2014 8:48:00	Maybe your DM would let the character hum verbal components?
#4 mellored Nov 25, 2014 8:52:58	1eejit wrote:
#5 Saelorn Nov 25, 2014 11:02:34	I would say that a Verbal component must be spoken clearly, so it would be impossible to cast such spells if you had no tongue.   The largest impact here would be on how society deals with unlawful spellcasting (kind of like removing the sword-hand from a bandit). If being de-tongued will make it impossible for you to cast spells, then they can do that as a penalty to neuter evil wizards. If you can cast spells when your tongue is removed, then the penalty for unlawful spellcasting must be death.
#6 ChrisCarlson Nov 25, 2014 11:18:23	What about when you include the fact that there is restorative magic that could potentially reattach, replace or regrow the lost tongue?
#7 mellored Nov 25, 2014 11:22:02	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#8 ppaladin123 Nov 25, 2014 11:27:09	For a warlock...the Great Old One goves you telepathy at level 1. Since you can telepathically communicate words/language with anyone without actually opening your mouth...maybe your telepathic "words" could fill the verbal component requirement of the spell. Who exactly needs to "hear" the words to make the spell work? The gods? The patron? The universe? I think your telepathic utterances could count.   Obviously this is not a RAW solution but it is flavorful and pretty badass and being a weird dude who speaks in people's heads is enough of a role play complication to really negate any "advantage" you get from not having to speak your words aloud that I think a lot of DMs would work with you on this; I certainly would.
#9 Saelorn Nov 25, 2014 11:36:31	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#10 ChrisCarlson Nov 25, 2014 17:15:28	Saelorn wrote:
#11 Saelorn Nov 25, 2014 21:31:08	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#12 Timborama Nov 26, 2014 6:29:17	To be honest, if it's a fun-RP thing or a character concept, I'll 100% allow this. I've allowed "blind" samurai with no detriment or benefit. The problem when introducing elements like this, is that you can customize them to death! They either become so unusable that your fun character concept is ruined ("What do you mean I have to attack with disadvantage all the time?! I'm a blind swordsman! I'm used to this!") or they get customized to the point of being OP ("Well, now that I have Blindsight at level 1...")   So, try and use it without any combat/utility drawback. But try to treat them like a normal character! So my blind samurai in a cloud of darkness couldn't "see" his opponents (mechanically blinding him on top of his RP blindness). Think of it like in 4E (if you played it) how you could knock an ooze prone. Sure it has no feat, but it has the "prone" condition and it's up to the DM to fluff that. So I apply that to my PCs. Yes he's blind, but he can "see" that orc ready to throw a handaxe at him. No, he can't tell what colors are. Have the same thing happen for the tongue-less PC. He can't communicate very well (Insight and hand gestures might help a bit), but he can cast spells just fine! Note, however, as a DM, your character MUST make noise with V component spells. So it may not be proper words like a whistle or a hum or a moan, but you still have to "speak" (so breaking stealth is a possibility), and bad guys can still "Spellcraft" your spells despite how unusual you cast them.   This means that I believe you should do so, even if it means you're "breaking the rules" of my campaign world (a reason Saelorn gave). Sure MOST people couldn't cast spells without a tongue, but you manage, due to your training (or divine intervention, or luck, or whatever). Again, though, this is NOT meant to make them OP. So if they're under water, gagged with a dirty sock, or in a Silence spell, they can't cast the spell (unless they use Subtle Spell of course). I like to think of it as my player's world as much as mine. And that also means I might introduce a bad guy a few campaigns later who spent 20 years sans a tongue that is now back into his usual spellcasting power because society scarred him, but didn't kill him...   IF, however, the PC goes underwater or in a silence spell and you then vehemently complain that they "should" be able to cast because reasons, a DM will tsk tsk you and might regret allowing that character to exist in the first place. Don't let that happen!   tl;dr-Talk to your DM. Explain you promise you're not doing it because you want to get a leg-up on the competition; it's simply a cool concept you thought up. He'll throw RP curveballs at you, sure. But this allows you to play a cool character without being unreasonably nerfed to the ground or OP to high heaven!
(Reply to #8) posineg	ppaladin123 wrote:
#14 BRJN Nov 26, 2014 16:29:40	Well, a tongue-less wizard would make a lousy Truenamer.  But if magic actually resides in Runes, he can get along just fine.   For fluff purposes, you could use Psionics images and tropes for 'what my character is doing when he casts spells'.  Your pouch of components is actually full of crystals instead of odd bits of stuff.   Note that whatever conclusion you come to in the end, it should also work with "my hands are crippled and I can't do the gestures" or "I'm allergic to many typical components so I don't use them."
#15 bonethug0108 Nov 27, 2014 17:56:21	I think to make this work you have to come up with a way to still use the intent of the verbal component without the use of normal speech. The intent is more about not being able to use the spells silently, so like someone said maybe you can hum.   If humming would break the vow of silence, maybe use rhythmic clapping(and just roll the somatic component in with it). It would change how some things work(restraining your hands now also prevents verbal only spells; silence spells would still work as intended), but is close enough to not be gamebreaking either way.