Is Hex worth it at high levels?

[GeneralVryth]

I can see how highlighting the absurdity of the application of your principles can be annoying, but in fact, once you say "DM can totally add requirements that are not in the text", the only limit to the application of that principle is how much players are willing to put up with.


In actual fact, a wild-shaped Druid can curse a new target with Hex. A Warlock polymorphed into a Great Ape can curse a new target with Hex. A Warlock hit by Feeblemind can curse a new target with Hex. Nothing in the actual text of the spell (or the features mentioned) says that any of these actions are impossible...

Unless, of course, the DM decides to make a houserule about it, creating the new rule of "components required to use the action granted by a spell", when the game only had the rule of "components required to cast a spell"... but then you have to go to every spell that grants new actions, make new rules about what components are required, if any, to use the actions granted by the spell, and make that new rule clear to your players, preferably before they make decisions like keeping Concentration on an underpowered spell for an entire day just so they can have a good use of it later on.

Or you can just not make this new and needlessly complicated and arbitrary rule (because I'm pretty sure it will only apply to some spells and not others... which means creating new imbalances between classes) and let players have fun with their spells.

No, completely mischaracterizing an argument to make the original seem absurd is what's annoying. And suggests someone not discussing in good faith. You can keep imagining the book is somehow clear on what it means that doesn't make it true. The very fact there is disagreement is at least some evidence that it isn't clear. And since you seem curious about an elegant solution there is one. Any spell with a re-cast option should be assumed to require a V or S component if the original casting had that component, unless the spell specifies otherwise. That's pretty straightforward. And actually that sentence or some other similar sentence in the books (perhaps saying they are assumed to need no components) would remove the need for this kind of discussion or DM rulings.

Yes, if you ignore the text in the book and invent your own stuff, you can make the opposite case.

I am no more ignoring the text of the book than you are. Agree to disagree time.