There's really not much POINT in identifying SLA's as they are being cast, since they can't be countered anyway.Wait, is that all other groups use identifying spells for? Huh. My group (when one of the players actually takes ranks in spellcraft for once) likes to know what Spells and SLA's do so they can change tactics or just so they know what a buff or debuff specifically did.
Identifying a spell in effect is one thing, and would be able to be done regardless of somatic or verbal components (since those are already done and gone at that point). We're talking about identifying a spell as it's being cast, before it's effect has emerged, which is quite different, and is really only of use to counter said spell.
Identifying a spell in effect is one thing, and would be able to be done regardless of somatic or verbal components (since those are already done and gone at that point). We're talking about identifying a spell as it's being cast, before it's effect has emerged, which is quite different, and is really only of use to counter said spell.
You can't always see the effect, though, like phantasmal killer.
You can't always see the effect, though, like phantasmal killer.
Identifying a spell in effect is one thing, and would be able to be done regardless of somatic or verbal components (since those are already done and gone at that point). We're talking about identifying a spell as it's being cast, before it's effect has emerged, which is quite different, and is really only of use to counter said spell.
phantasmal killer is also an instantaneous spell, and doesn't persist long enough for identification to have any purpose.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
phantasmal killer is also an instantaneous spell, and doesn't persist long enough for identification to have any purpose.You can't always see the effect, though, like phantasmal killer.
Identifying a spell in effect is one thing, and would be able to be done regardless of somatic or verbal components (since those are already done and gone at that point). We're talking about identifying a spell as it's being cast, before it's effect has emerged, which is quite different, and is really only of use to counter said spell.
Except you know the foe can cast 4th level spells, and that if the target dies, they weren't actually killed by a death effect so raise dead will work on them. Also, if you can get info about spell DCs (depends on GM), you might be able to use that to determine if they have Spell Focus and the like - and if they do, that can inform what other types of spells might be forthcoming.
There's a decent amount of tactical advantage to be gained from knowing what your foes are casting, even for "one and done" spells.
Identifying a spell as it is cast is still useful if the spell otherwise has no visual effect.
Not being able to identify that as spell has even been cast can have a dramatic effect on the scenario.
|
I have a question as a DM and I was wondering what you guys think... (Seemed like a good thread to ask.)
Same scenario except one includes a sorcerer pc and the other psychic.
The group enters a small shop to question one of the workers. Noticing the worker the psychic casts telempathic projection to shift the worker's stance from unfriendly to indifferent. The worker passes his/her save and beyond... a headache has no ideas the spell was cast. The shop worker doesn't have spellcraft or kno arcana trained and seeing absolutely no visible cues of the casting of a spell doesn't realize what has happened.
Same scenario, the sorcerer walks in and casts charm person. This casting has very clear verbal and somatic components. Superstitious shop worker is immediately terrified and enraged as the spell is being cast. It's down to initiative, and the npc's save. If he passes he calls the guards or the owner of the shop and the entire group gets thrown in the cells for the weekend.
So I guess the question ultimately is, "Is one of the benefits of psychic spells that they aren't immediately identified as spellcasting by NPC's without spellcraft or kno arcana trained?"
[Edited to Fix Problems with Scenario]
I have a question as a DM and I was wondering what you guys think... (Seemed like a good thread to ask.)
Same scenario except one includes a sorcerer pc and the other psychic.
The group enters a small shop to question one of the workers. Noticing the worker the psychic casts telempathic projection to shift the worker's stance from unfriendly to indifferent. The shop worker doesn't have spellcraft or kno arcana trained and seeing absolutely no visible cues of the casting of a spell doesn't realize what has happened.
Same scenario, the sorcerer walks in and casts charm person. This casting has very clear verbal and somatic components. Superstitious shop worker is immediately terrified and enraged as the spell is being cast. It's down to initiative between the caster and the npc whether the local constable is called and the entire group gets thrown in the cells for the weekend.
So I guess the question ultimately is, "Is one of the benefits of psychic spells that they aren't immediately identified as spellcasting by NPC's without spellcraft or kno arcana trained?"
The scenarios you've described seem to imply that the worker fails the save vs. the psychic but succeeded vs. the sorceror. If the worker failed vs. the sorceror, the worker would treat the spellcasting in the best possible light because the sorceror is his friend.
So, just to be sure, if someone can see the caster, casting a Psychic spell, they can make a Spellcraft to identify it, and they do provoke when casting it?
I believe this is the intent, yes.