Tindalen |
If a spell has no verbal or somatic components, can you still "clearly see the spell as it's being cast" to identify it?
Specific reading of the spellcraft skill states that "you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast". This lends to the only way to block someone from spell crafting your spell is to not be visible to the. Total concealment, total cover, or some sort of invisibility will all work to keep from being spellcrafted.
Even a spell with no components at all, purely mental, can be spell crafted as you can see the spell being cast.
Claxon |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The devs have discussed this before. Technically speaking eschew material, silent spell, still spell, etc have no effect on being able to identify the spell. There is no penalty. Nothing.
The idea being that there is a visible energy that manifests around the caster when they begin casting. It's part of why you just can't hide spell casting without very specific feats or abilities.
They did however suggest that it might be reasonable to apply a -5 penalty per spell component removed, but were clear that such would be a house rule and not actually supported by the rules. I believe it was also clarified that if you did this, the spell could still be identified because as I mentioned there are manifestations of the spell around the character that can still be seen even if there are no components that the character must supply for the spell.
DM_Blake |
Yeah, it's best to think of Silent Spell as a trick for spellcasting when you cannot speak (Silenced, gagged, underwater, etc.) and to think of Still Spell as a trick for spellcasting when you cannot gesture (bound, pinned, caught in a web, etc.).
They are not tricks to hide your spellcasting so people can't see you cast the spell; they can ALWAYS see you cast the spell. Heck, if Spellcraft doesn't require a Perception check and is not limited by distance penalties like Perception is, then spellcasting must be very obvious indeed - hiding the wiggling fingers and wagging tongues does not, by RAW, make it less obvious.
Orfamay Quest |
They are not tricks to hide your spellcasting so people can't see you cast the spell; they can ALWAYS see you cast the spell. Heck, if Spellcraft doesn't require a Perception check and is not limited by distance penalties like Perception is, then spellcasting must be very obvious indeed - hiding the wiggling fingers and wagging tongues does not, by RAW, make it less obvious.
"I have written `Gandalf is here' in runes all can read from Rivendell to the Mouths of Anduin."
Kayerloth |
They did however suggest that it might be reasonable to apply a -5 penalty per spell component removed, but were clear that such would be a house rule and not actually supported by the rules. I believe it was also clarified that if you did this, the spell could still be identified because as I mentioned there are manifestations of the spell around the character that can still be seen even if there are no components that the character must supply for the spell.
The other problem for me when considering adopting the above as a houserule is it also fails to account for why it is no more or less difficult to identify something like Power Word Stun (only a V component) vs Sunburst (with V and S and M components) to begin with.
And for the record your Spellcraft check is effected by the same mods as if it were a Perception check:
Action: Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.
Claxon |
Quote:They did however suggest that it might be reasonable to apply a -5 penalty per spell component removed, but were clear that such would be a house rule and not actually supported by the rules. I believe it was also clarified that if you did this, the spell could still be identified because as I mentioned there are manifestations of the spell around the character that can still be seen even if there are no components that the character must supply for the spell.The other problem for me when considering adopting the above as a houserule is it also fails to account for why it is no more or less difficult to identify something like Power Word Stun (only a V component) vs Sunburst (with V and S and M components) to begin with.
I assume it's because the normal form of the spell has certain specific components to it. When you remove a normal component it makes it harder to identify because everyone knows a certain spell has certain specific components required to invoke it. So spells of equal level are equally difficult to identify, because thats the rule. But they get harder to identify depending on how much from the norm you remove them. But you are right that it doesn't make much sense that all spells of the same level have the same difficult to be identified despite not all have the same number of components.
That is honestly why I don't implement it. Also, I don't like to make anything easier for casters. Which allowing the metamagic feats to effectively increase the DC of spell craft does do....a little.
And for the record your Spellcraft check is effected by the same mods as if it were a Perception check:
CRB, Skill Descriptions wrote:Action: Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.
As, for that. I didn't say that, so you have to take it up with the Tarrasque.
Abraham spalding |
Yeah when the discussion came out where the devs spoke up they seemed to completely ignore that part the entire time it was being pointed out to them (and the rest of the thread). It wasn't that they said it doesn't happen, they just flat out didn't address this part one way or another.
Personally I would (and have and will) say that being unable to see the components is equivalent to terrible conditions for each missing component and gives a +5 to the DC for each such component missing from what is normally required for the spell.
CriticalQuit |
I imagine you can identify a spell as it's being finished, since even with the lack of verbal/somatic components the spell's actual effect still happens.
That said, I do think silent/still spell does prevent spellcasting from being conspicuous enough that an unaware character can't try to identify the spell. The Sandman's Dramatic Subtext would have the same effect.