Spell Component Bag

[Arcticwarrior]

+1 rep, yes, yes, yes. We must always have more inventory bags. Although it could glitch I wouldn't put in ALL of my important stuff into the bag, but scrolls, spell components, and others posibly. Maybe not potions thought because you have to use the potions thus making it harder to use them

[KillEveryone]

Since they have trouble having the components taken out of a bag...

Adding another tab onto the backpack just for components should work, make that tab no more than like 10 to 12 slots and only components can go into that tab. There is plenty of space on the left, right, and bottom sides of the backpack pannel to add more tabs. You shouldn't need more than 12 slots, even if you multiclass casters. Make this tab available to caster classes and it can size according to how many levels your caster can handle. Bard would have 6 slots, Wiz would have 10(Stoneskin takes a special component). They could have the bag adjust size according to how many different components you put into there with a max amount of 12 different types.

[Doxmaster]

Because we're asking to implement the spell component bag here, in this thread!
Eschew materials isn't such a worthwhile feat to take at the moment, when/if spell component bag ever implemented, the feat would have to be altered or it'd lose its only arguable benefit currently. See the the reason people argue they'd take eschew materials right now is to save a bunch inventory slots, at a cost of additional sp per cast (even though I personally won't waste a feat just for that), implementation of spell components bag will kill the only real benefit of that feat. That's why I asked for a change to eschew materials at the same time of supporting the implementation of spell component bag.

So…there is a cost and a benefit to taking the feat? Like, oh lets just say, most other selected feat in the game? Just staying on spell feats, because I know them better than other feats, Maximize gives you much stronger attack spells at the cost of sp. A benefit and a consequence to choosing it over, say, dodge or something.

There're worthless feats around in DDO, those feats also need improvements and have been asked uncountable times before on the forum. Oh yea, there're fighters out there who take iron will if you don't know. I'm not trolling here but to throw in the idea to improve eschew material at the same time of implementing spell component bag. I think you might want to be out of this thread because you don't even know what it's started with.

The worthless feats in DDo are simply worthless feats. PnP had them, so they were added in here (most of then copied straight from the books). Why improve something that was mean to be worthless unless used carefully? The people that selected that mostly useless feat are doing it to being the best at doing this, that and something else. And, from a quick check of builds here in the forums, iron will is considered an extra thing and a useless feat; if you have a feat free, you don’t need anything else and you’ve already furthered your build as much as possible, feel free to toss it in, but there are a lot of better feats. Not many builds have it without someone quickly saying “Or you could take another toughness” or something. And the toughness suggestion is usually mulled over for a while, seriously considered.
Feats become useful and useless as the game changes/updates. Even now, people are begging to get rid of a useless monk feat required for other useful feats, and they probably won’t succeed. So they will continue taking the feat they don’t like.
If the bag is ever implemented, eschew will just be a useless feat. If a “reduce cost” feat were added, that would be nice, but why would a core feat be changed so much, just because it became useless?

You may come back to read if you're into the starting point of this thread. We gotta give eschew materials more benefits if the bag is ever out there, include what I've suggested of using no material at all, including those special spells. Some may consider it's still not enough to convience people take that feat, because a lot vets don't lack the money to buy components. That's why I also suggested to even give sp reduction to cast those selective spells.

Oh. You are the forum master? Oh sorry, I didn’t know! Please, what threads can I post in, sir? *lol* Right before you commented on me saying “no one has asked for iron will to be improved…” even though I at least searched the forum for Iron will suggestions and found none. Is it possible I missed it? Yes. Is it possible I missed 40 suggestions on the same thing? Not as likely.
Not sure which developer you begged to get mastery over the forums from, but I find it impressive that you chose not to change ‘community member’ to ‘this forum’s king’ or something. No inflated ego there!

Please be constructive and make the game better and instead of blah blah blah no one has requested to make it more worthwhile. Although I never knew how you got the authorization from every DDO player to speak of "no one" here, anyway, I'll be the last on your list and first of the community to speak for it if there's really no one, alright?

I was being constructive; I was suggesting an alternative to the suggested game change. It is also immature to “blah blah blah” someone; it takes away from your argument, just as saying “also, give us cheaper spells and free stoneskin and create undead” takes away from the “add a spell component bag” argument. It makes it seem like you are simply trying to worm out as many advantageous things as possible out of this, in as little time as possible.
Using the current Teacher Contract movement as an example, the representatives don’t ask for boosted pay for all the after school hours they stay with their students because they are part of a club, etc. AND free houses in every state. Would like free houses? Yes. But it takes away from the “Need vs Greed” of their argument, to put it in game terms.
By the way, if you are on the list of people that agree with what I said (as you just said you were, though such a list only exists in your head), last slot or first or one away from the exact middle, you are still on the list. What you were trying to say was “I WONT be on that list”. Considering how long the forum has had suggestions like this, you are probably somewhere around the three hundredth person to go along with this suggestion, barely anyone posted in each thread. You are probably the first this hour of this day, but no where near the first.

[vettkinn]

An excellent idea, comrades!

/signed

[ninjaeli]

just get rid of all components and make every spell verbal

[KillEveryone]

just get rid of all components and make every spell verbal

I do know that this was meant in jest but I would say it is a option.

Most components, even on a first time caster, are not really expensive even in a budget.
.....Casters shouldn't be getting beat on like a melee so they shouldn't have a really expensive repair bill.
.....Scrolls and wands are useless unless it is something for healing/repairing because they just are not effective so scrolls tend to be relegated as a way to fill out a wizards spell book. There are scrolls that can be used for buffing but not many people want to use them just for that purpose since SP is free and I don't know of any buffing spells except Stoneskin that require a component.
.....They do have to buy consumables for healing but it doesn't take very many pots to top off a wiz or sorc even if they are built for hitpoints because they just don't get very many hitpoints even with a maxed out CON.

Lower level components are cheap even if bought in a quantity of 1000. Higher level components and stoneskin components are more expensive, I think stoneskin is the most expensive, but by the time you are able to cast higher stuff you will be doing quests that offer better quality loot and will be able to afford those components easily.

I don't have to stock up that often, maybe once every 12 days of play time...I just stocked up on components the other day, it has been a least three weeks since I bought any components(about 12 days of playing the rest I had real life work) and I only topped off most with about 100 to 200 needed to do so, one spell level I almost purchased a full 1000(had 89 left) and almost 500 for stoneskin special component. A lot of used spells don't use components as it is, and the ones that do are not used as much as others because only a few spells tend to be effective in a SP cost to damage output.

The other side of this argument....
Kiters have to purchase ammo so should any other person that has a ranged component.
Plat(small one) sink.
(Trying to come up with at least a third since I put up 3 for the pro side of the argument but I can't. Feel free to add something)

-----------------
Really, I can deal with having 10 slots in my backpack devoted to components.

10 out of 100 is not very many and I keep my equipment down to a minimum because I look to see what I actually use and if I don't use something for a very long time then it gets put into the bank and I have yet to have a moment where I wished I had that item from the bank and into my backpack.

Cost has never been an issue for me neither will it ever be an issue. I made sure my moneymaker was set before I indulged in stuff that was just gravy.

I won't ever take eschue materials either just to open up backpack space because that feat is useless and a waste of SP. SP would be better served toward damage and if you are too cheap to pay for materials or feel you really need 10 backpack spaces, then I think you need help.

A component bag would be nice to reduce some backpack clutter but overall...meh.