Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 FallingIcicle Sep 19, 2014 18:37:08	It seems that there is no gp limit to what you can create with Conjurer's Minor Conjuration feature. The only limits specified in the feature are that the item has to be non-magical, it can't be larger than 3 feet on a side and it can't weigh more than 10 lbs. So it looks like you can use it to create anything that is within those limits, no matter how expensive. The only item in the equipment chapter you can't create is a potion of healing, since that's magical. But if you want to create expensive consumables such as alchemist's fire, acid, holy water, etc., it looks like that's totally legal. And hey, I have no problem with that. That's pretty cool!   The lack of a gp limit does seem to run into some serious issues, however, when it comes to material components. Need a 300gp diamond for the cleric's revivify spell? Well, it's not magical, isn't more than 3 feet wide and doesn't weight more than 10 lbs. So by the RAW, there doesn't seem to be anything that's stopping you from conjuring it and letting the cleric use it as the material component for the spell. Am I missing something, or is there something in the rules that prohibits this?
#2 GreyMorgan Sep 19, 2014 19:17:39	DM ruling.
#3 FallingIcicle Sep 19, 2014 19:20:10	GreyMorgan wrote:
(Reply to #3) GreyMorgan	FallingIcicle wrote:
#5 2Chlorobutanal Sep 19, 2014 20:05:35	There is a specific prohibition in the Creation spell that prevents creating spell components.  I would extend this to Minor Conjuration as well.   If you want a strict, by-the-book prohibition: Minorly Conjured diamonds are obviously magical and not permanent.  Therefore, they are not really worth any money, certainly not 300gp, and could not function for the revivify spell.   Alternatively, the Minor Conjuration ability says only that it creates "an object" in the "form of" something you have seen.  It's not said that you actually conjure existing items or create a new item of that type, but rather more of a magical "copy" of an object you have seen.  For a lot of uses, having the same form is good enough (stool, bottle, cup, dagger), but the "magical object" is not at its core a "stool" or a "bottle," so it cannot be used for a magical spell that requires "a stool" or "a bottle."   Additionally, liquids or items with complex mechanisms could be interpreted to either:   not be one item (glass bottle + holy water) suffer damage when broken or separated, and thus disappear before performing a purpose (such as antitoxin, holy water, alchemist's fire, etc.)
#6 Undrhil Sep 19, 2014 20:29:17	So, instead of rewarding a player for thinking outside of the box, you stifle their creativity.  Then, when they stare blankly at you because you have asked "What do you want to do?" they will (apparently, rightly so) ask "What do you want me to do?"
#7 2Chlorobutanal Sep 19, 2014 22:44:12	Being ridiculous or outlandish is not the same as being creative.  It actually requires a good deal less creativity than working within some constraints to find new ideas or novel applications.   There's a large difference between creativity that makes sense for a second-level at-will feature and "creativity" that's essentially "I'm so cool, look at me break the rules and show up other people."   "What do you want to do?" "Create infinite currency and render the game pointless at level 2, because I can buy everything in the setting using Minor Conjuration."   Actual creativity would be things like:   "I conjure the form of step ladder to help me see over the wall."   "I conjure the form of a key I saw earlier on the guard's keyring that I was inspecting."   "I conjure the form of a bottle to hold some of the odd liquid we found in this cave."   "I conjure the form of a weapon for our rogue who got one eaten by the rust monster."   It's a level two feature.  It should obviously not be more powerful than part of a level 20 Druid feature.
#8 FallingIcicle Sep 19, 2014 23:01:46	2Chlorobutanal wrote:
(Reply to #8) 2Chlorobutanal	According to the "creativity" being prescribed, you could just create expensive material components for casters and take a percentage of the cost.  (I'll Minor Conjure a 10,000 gp diamond for you for only 2,000 gp.")
#10 2Chlorobutanal Sep 19, 2014 23:22:45	I disagree.  I think that material components, especially expensive ones, serve as limitations or what would otherwise lead to silly situations ("let's raise everyone in the campaign world who dies before old age").   Minor Conjuration being silent about material components to me means that the author either thought it was a foregone conclusion that material components would be off-limits (or that the sentence describing the object being "obviously magical," or that it conjures the "form of something" rather than the actual something) was a clear message that the ability cannot be used to for material components.
#11 FallingIcicle Sep 19, 2014 23:41:02	2Chlorobutanal wrote:
#12 Undrhil Sep 20, 2014 0:06:34	Considering that these people have been developing versions of D&D for several years now *and* have played it for many more years, I'm sure they considered the implications of players wanting to use this as a way to get around certain limitations of being a level 2 character, such as limited funds.   Also, as what point does a concentration spell take up it's needed component, if it consumes it?  If it consumes it at casting, then the item is consumed as the spell is cast, therefore, it is gone before minor conjuration stops.  If it's a component that isn't consumed, are there any rules that say you have to have a component on your person the entire time you are concentrating on the spell?  When you consider that a majority of the spells in 5e just *require* the component and don't consume it, is it that far-fetched to see a party pooling their (once again, *LIMITED*) funds for a specific high-value component that the Cleric and Wizard can *both* use in some spell, and have the two share it between them?
(Reply to #5) Llenlleawg	2Chlorobutanal wrote: