Hi Folks,
I'm in the process of creating a 12th level Illusionist who wants to make his spells incredibly hard to ID for opponents who use Spellcraft's "Identify a spell as it is being cast" option. As a result, I'd like to compare and contrast all the known character-build methods of boosting my Illusionist's obfuscation attempts for such an opposing roll. For example ... what feats, traits, spells, magic gear, etc. are there that could make this Spellcraft check a real pain in the butt for my enemies. Since my Illusionist will be facing a lot of other spellcasters in this campaign, I need to protect my illusions from being disbelieved as much as possible.
Thank you!
P.S. Besides all Paizo material, I also welcome all 3.5 and Pathfinder 3PP sources as well.
Well maxing out your spell craft wont make it harder to identify your spells. Unless there is something I'm unaware of.
The DC to identify a spell is 15 + spell level.
About the only thing I know of that is going to help you with what you would like to accomplish is the feat Cunning Caster. Which will allow you to hide your spell casting. If hidden, they can't identify it.
The trait Magical Flair will add two to the DC, and allow misidentification rather than failure (although as a random spell of the school, that's still not great for illusion).
The Rakshasa bloodline arcana (so for Sorcs and Arcanists) is +1/2 level to DC and failure by five or more is misidentification as a spell of your choice- what illusionists really want.
Also to note, I was very much influenced by a 3.5 WotC feat I saw called Mysterious Magic (in an Eberron book)
https://eberron-hok.obsidianportal.com/wiki_pages/mysterious-magic
Granted, the way this issue is handled in PF is quite a bit differently than it was in 3.5. But you get the gist...
As Douglas, Claxon and QuidEst said above, this is a challenging optimization scenario for an illusion-casting specialist.
*****
Is it possible to get that Rakshasa Bloodline bonus without dipping into Sorcerer?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cover or concealment can help.
A lot of people don't realize it, but it is in the rules that you can apply penalties to Spellcraft based on Perception modifiers.
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 mentioned above, the Rakshasa bloodline also allows you to sometimes fool people. More likely to work against Clerics, Oracles and Sorcerers than Wizards though. Less skill points and lower Int makes it harder for them to identify spells.
Cover or concealment can help.
A lot of people don't realize it, but it is in the rules that you can apply penalties to Spellcraft based on Perception modifiers.
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.
In light of BretI's helpful find, I'm wondering how a wizard with the spell Silent Table running on his staff (for example) ... would work when casting a spell with Verbal components?
Granted, a cast spell can be ID'ed if it is seen, but it is also beholden to the Perception skill for other bonuses and penalties. Of which Silent Table, would grant the spellcaster a +20 DC to anyone trying to roll a Perception check on Verbal components coming out of the 5' diameter emanation. See where I'm going with this?
A level of Bard gives you access to the Spellsong feat, which might help though you'd be awfully noticeable.
Also, the rules for sniping can be applied to spells with a short enough casting time.
In light of BretI's helpful find, I'm wondering how a wizard with the spell Silent Table running on his staff (for example) ... would work when casting a spell with Verbal components?
Granted, a cast spell can be ID'ed if it is seen, but it is also beholden to the Perception skill for other bonuses and penalties. Of which Silent Table, would grant the spellcaster a +20 DC to anyone trying to roll a Perception check on Verbal components coming out of the 5' diameter emanation. See where I'm going with this?
The FAQ indicates it isn't just the spellcasting components that allow identification. If they can see you cast a spell, there are undefined visuals that indicate what spell is being cast.
Given that, you could give a small penalty to the Spellcraft check if a part of the spell has verbal components. You could not claim the full +20 to DC since much of what is being done does not depend on sound.
That's kinda what I was hoping for, BretI ... based on a similar interpretation of the same reference source that you're reading from.
Even with a minimized opposing Spellcraft check, Silent Table would give a Wizard a significant boost for his illusions ... and he could cast any kind of Verbal-component spells he wants to while benefitting from the Silent Table. Unlike the spell type restrictions he'd have while working under the benefits of an Invisibility spell.
Cunning Caster is a much-needed feat. Unfortunately, it's also a very badly designed feat. First, it applies a feat tax with Deceitful -- not a feat most full casters will ever want to invest in. (To be fair, Deceitful is not a bad feat. It's just that there are so many better ways to fill your feat slots.) Second, it uses Bluff against Perception. Unfortunately, the feat does not specify *whose* Perception -- if you're in a fight with six ghouls, do they all get checks? I have to say, the language of the feat suggests that, yes, they all do. But never mind that. Bluff vs. Perception isn't so bad, but then the feat applies a crapload of negative modifiers: -4 each for verbal, somatic and material components, and another -4 "if the spell produces an obvious effect". So, illusionist, want to cast Major Image? -16 penalty. Deceitful will give you +4, but that still leaves you -12 in the hole. If you're a sorceror or have Eschew Materials, congratulations -- now you're up to -8. Still not looking too good, unless you're facing a singularly unobservant bunch of opponents.
About the only thing I know of that is going to help you with what you would like to accomplish is the feat Cunning Caster. Which will allow you to hide your spell casting. If hidden, they can't identify it.
It isn't that bad a feat if you are a psychic caster (such as a mesmerist-a specialist at enchantment and illusions). They avoid the verbal and somatic components entirely in return for the can of worms that comes from emotion and thought components. They also get large bonuses to bluff.
Also, deceitful is useful to cover up some of those penalties- at 10 ranks, it completely covers up the 'obvious effect' penalty entirely- and before that, it at least makes it a manageable total of -2. Not only that...but it is something that a human character can pick up at level 1- is the tax THAT bad when you can accomplish that?
It would be a bad designed feat if you are only working for core...but there are plenty of classes that do not have that problem now.
Hi Folks,
I'm in the process of creating a 12th level Illusionist who wants to make his spells incredibly hard to ID for opponents who use Spellcraft's "Identify a spell as it is being cast" option. As a result, I'd like to compare and contrast all the known character-build methods of boosting my Illusionist's obfuscation attempts for such an opposing roll. For example ... what feats, traits, spells, magic gear, etc. are there that could make this Spellcraft check a real pain in the butt for my enemies. Since my Illusionist will be facing a lot of other spellcasters in this campaign, I need to protect my illusions from being disbelieved as much as possible.
Thank you!
P.S. Besides all Paizo material, I also welcome all 3.5 and Pathfinder 3PP sources as well.
The Veiled Illusionist is a great prestige class for this!
This unlocks:
Halfling: At 2nd level, a veiled illusionist can spend 1 point from her veil pool as a free action while casting an illusion spell to disguise her spellcasting. Creatures attempting to identify the spell as it's being cast must succeed at a Will save (DC 15 + the number of points remaining in the illusionist's veil pool) or misidentify the spell as a spell of the illusionist's choice. The illusory spell must be the same level as the true spell, and must be one the illusionist can cast.
Getting back to my non-psychic caster OP ... can any of you think of any other magic items, mundane items, feats, traits, etc. that would help with hindering an opposing Spellcraft check to ID my illusionist's spells?
Thank you in advance!
The Veiled Illusionist is a great prestige class for this!
The veiled illusionist is probably your least bad option, yes.
At 2nd level, a veiled illusionist can spend 1 point from her veil pool as a free action while casting an illusion spell to disguise her spellcasting. Creatures attempting to identify the spell as it's being cast must succeed at a Will save (DC 15 + the number of points remaining in the illusionist's veil pool) or misidentify the spell as a spell of the illusionist's choice. The illusory spell must be the same level as the true spell, and must be one the illusionist can cast.Doing the math, at 12th level you'll probably have (PrC level 7 + casting modifier) about 14 points in your veil pool, so your save DC will start at a respectable 28. The PrC encourages you to use your veil pool for other stuff, though, so that number is a maximum -- it will often be lower. Anyway, an equivalent-level enemy caster will probably have a Will save around +10 or so, so you have about a 90% chance of pulling this off when your pool is full.
I think Dansome has it -- Veiled Illusionist is the way to go.
Doug M.
I disagree. This DC is like at level 10 of the PRC. That is when you are a crazy high level as well.
I think you are better off applying perception penalties. Keep in mind distance an objects will that much harder for them. This stacks with Rakshasa bloodline. So add those pennies to make it impossible or difficult.
This could be fun. A race with bluff bonuses, a few feats invested in bluff (not a bad skill to invest in anyways, and more so for someone who deals in illusions), and a Mesmerist with Eschew Materials. Now you have no verbal, somatic, or material components. The visible effects of the spell gives you a -4 which you covered with feats, and the rest of it is your bluff vs their perception and all the distance negs. Sounds like a good way to make this nasty to me. If you can happen to be a Raksasha, gain the chance that they'll misidentify the spell on a nat 1 even if they do pass your bluff check, and you've got a really good odds of messing up what they thought they saw. Then you add another bluff check next round to say you can do worse than that if they don't back down.
I personally like the idea of a person that pretends they are not even a spell caster. If you make all the spell casting and such unnoticable as a mesmerist, then they only look slightly different from an aristocrat (3/4 BAB, some skill points, you can fake medium armor proficiency with armor expert, etc.). They are just "very persuasive".
Using the same modifiers as Perception, keep these in mind:
Every ten feet adds one to DC.
Being invisible is awesome.
You're welcome. :D
Yeah, it's a good idea to become intimately familiar with the various entries on the Perception Modifiers table for the Perception skill. While being Invisible is indeed the gold standard for borking an opponent's Spellcraft check, there are also lesser (yet still valuable) ways to also get benefit from the other table entries. Such as distracting your opponent and subjecting him to "terrible conditions". Which is where your teammates will be useful to help synergize these potential benefits.
Also dont they have to see you cast, as in if you cast ahead of time there is no spellcraft check?
Correct.
There is a possibility of a Knowledge: Arcana check, DC 20 + spell level, but for the case of Illusions I believe that they would need some reason to not believe it before making that check.
We've neglected to mention Secret Signs. After the FAQ update regarding hidden casting, this feat still lets you cast on the sly.
The OP here ....
I'm also working on my 12th level illusionist to have useful, low-cost vision-impairment spells to start off battles where illusions will likely be the *2nd* spell cast versus spellcraft-capable casters.
Again, to go with the theme of "if you can't see the spellcaster casting, you can't ID via Spellcraft".
We've neglected to mention Secret Signs. After the FAQ update regarding hidden casting, this feat still lets you cast on the sly.
I disagree, the implicit assumption of Secret Signs is that only spell casting components are used to hide spellcasting. Post-FAQ that is no longer the case.
If you've got the feat you need to either retrain it or modify it to reduce the somatic component penalty that applies when you use Cunning Caster.