Is there a general rule that states whether ALL hexes require this or don't (speech and hand motions). If there isn't such a standard rule, do you simply go by the description of the hex and use your best judgment in making the decision? I appreciate the help.
I'm not aware of a general rule. However, a recent FAQ did state that the Cackle hex does require audible cackling, meaning that you can't 'stealth Cackle'.
Hexes are supernatural abilities (Su) which generally don't require components.
When you say hexes "generally don't require components" would you agree that referencing the actual hex itself would be a fair way to make the final determination.
As Xaratherus pointed out Cackle would seem to make sense in utilizing a verbal component without question.
Thanks
Since I don't think there's a general rule, then I would agree that the description of the Hex (or other ability) would be sufficient to determine what components (if any) were required.
When you say hexes "generally don't require components" would you agree that referencing the actual hex itself would be a fair way to make the final determination.
RAW, no. More precisely, unless the hex itself explicitly states that it requires a component, I would consider the the general rule that supernatural abilities do not require components to be the controlling one. I've seen too many cases of bad blood caused when a game master starts to limit player actions based on flavor text.
Of course, you can house rule it however you like. If for some reason you think that witches are totally overpowering, nerf them.
I'm not sure I agree. The recent FAQ regarding Cackle seems to indicate that an action within the description of an ability is intended to be a requirement. It does not list a requirement for a somatic component, but the designers have said that the cackle is required.
It can sometimes be difficult to separate fluff from crunch, but I tend toward the idea that 'fluff' is still intended to generally affect mechanics. I mean, take a look at the whole Stealth discussion: In the end, the fact that the description of Armor Class in the DEX section, and the mention of the word 'unaware', was pivotal toward how the system was intended to work the whole time.
Hexes all say what kind of ability they are. All are Su, Ex, or Sp, with most being Su. NONE of those require verbal or somatic "components."
Cackle is unique, it works from you actually laughing, so you need to make sound, though the target doesn't need to hear you, nor do you even need to hear yourself. But it would fail to work if the witch was in an area of silence. (If the target was in silence but the witch was not, it would work just fine)
Cackle is unique, it works from you actually laughing, so you need to make sound
In other words, it's an Su that has a verbal component.
I'm not trying to be flippant, but my point was that saying that "NONE [Su, Ex, Sp] of those require" components is correct - up until the point where they do, like Cackle. So it's hard to call that a universal rule.
For example, I would require that a Witch have a cauldron (or similar cooking vessel) in order to use Poison Steep. Does it list it as having a component? No. Does the 'fluff' make sense that you need something cauldron-like in order to use it? Yes.
Cackle requires a verbal componant as much as a harpy's Captivating Song requires one... just because something has a vocal or sonic component =/= verbal componant. Only spells require components. (Su) abilities might require sound but that is completely different.
I suppose if we're being technical, the definition of a verbal component does imply speech rather than noise - although it doesn't really define it beyond that except in cases where the speech must be understood in order for the spell to function.
So I'll concede that - but in any case, that just means the mentioned Su abilities would require vocal components (not defined, but apparently exists since the FAQ implies it), and the statement "Supernatural abilities do not require components," is still not universally true.
I don't disagree that some - most, probably - Sus have no component requirements. Some do. I think that it's a sensible rule to read over an Su and extrapolate required components (sounds, objects, etc.) from its description.
But if someone tore a witches voice box out they could still laugh cackle but you wouldn't hear a sound. See if you make it require sound then what arbitrates how much sound and how needs to hear, can a witch cackle underwater, can they cackle in the zone of a silence spell. As soon as you start making exceptions to general rules you start needing more exceptions. Surely its just easier to say a witch can always cackle.
So far there is one exception clearly spelled out for the witch, the Cackle. Your example foresees a situation that is not part of the rule system (ripping out a voice box). Its like saying the Message spell doesn't work because your out of cell-phone range.
Underwater, the cackle spell can still beheard, sound does travel underwater. In the area of effect of a Silence spell there would be no sound from the caster, so no Cackle.
It does bring up the question of "What if they are gagged?"
It does bring up the question of "What if they are gagged?"
And s--t like this is the reason that I say Su abilities do not require components, end of story.
If I remember my phonetics class correctly, you can still cackle while gagged; the gag will not interfere with the necessary articulators, mostly because cackling doesn't involve consonants. Now we get to discuss how this applies to a non-human vocal tract, because to the best of my knowledge, no one has ever had an opportunity to dissect an elf to see if their vocal articulators work the same well-understood way that humans' do. And we also hope that every group world-wide has the advantage of someone who has enough detailed knowledge of phonetics to remember this trivia.
Similarly, the Poison Steep hex states that "the witch can use her cauldtron to..." Technically speaking, this not only demands that she use a cauldron (not merely any cooking vessel), but that it also needs to be her cauldron, and she can't borrow one from a friend. This interpretation to me is patently ridiculous. One can just as easily prepare drugged chocolate cordials or a magical poisoned sandwich as poisoned fruits. (I'd like a ham on whole wheat, hold the enchanted mayo of eternal slumber, please....) Again, any player with expertise in confectionary or who worked in a deli can tell you that.
The authors of the APG, correctly, did not want to write a legal document and say something like "the witch can use a method of food preparation, including but not limited to a cauldron, stewpot, Dutch oven, [...]" to describe what is essentially a one-paragraph description of something we're all familiar with anyway : the evil queen from Snow White. But as soon as you start trying to decide whether or not you should allow something based on your personal understanding of the mechanics behind what is fundamentally magical fantasy anyway,....
Basically, rule of cool. If you think the witch needs nerfing, nerf her. If you think that hexes should only work when done at night in a storm during an eclipse, then you get to so rule, 'cause it's your game. But trying to figure out how the real world physics behind the mayo of eternal slumber works is probably not fun and almost certainly a waste of your time.
Where in the description of supernatural abilities does it state that it doesn't require any hand movement or vocal sounds? Yes it does not incur an AoO, but it doesn't say in the description anything in regards to a supernatural ability not requiring the murmuring of some sound?
Just curious and not trying to start a major debate. I really want to get this right when ruling it on my game table. I did state to the witch player at my recent game that their cackle did require sound. The reason for this post was because admittedly I wasn't sure if my ruling was correct or not and neither were they!
Where in the description of supernatural abilities does it state that it doesn't require any hand movement or vocal sounds? Yes it does not incur an AoO, but it doesn't say in the description anything in regards to a supernatural ability not requiring the murmuring of some sound?
Same place in the description of supernatural abilities it states that it does require hand movements or vocal sounds.
If you want to add an additional layer of complexity then that's your prerogative.
The simply fact is you have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to rules otherwise you could create an infinitely large rule set to cover every conceivable instance where something can or can't be done.
Things like this are exactly why a GM exists, because no rule set can cover every situation.
Probably why I'm enjoy an Edge of the empire game at the moment along side my pathfinder game. its a nice change not to have everything spelled out in the rules so the GM can rule as makes sense to him rather than forever looking up rules and errata.
A gagged witch can still laugh. Again, nothing about cackle requires anyone to HEAR it. Merely that the witch laugh.
I'm actually re-thinking if silence would actually stop a cackle or not, I may have spoken too hastily. As long as she is able to take the physical action to cackle (ie, not paralyzed or unconscious or whatever), she's still laughing, even if there's no sound coming out.