With the (semi)new FAQ stating that all spells have obvious elements to the casting process, regardless of components used (or not used), I've made a new Metamagic Feat for the purpose of meeting that very goal.
Hidden Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast spells that go unnoticed by the unwary observer.
Prerequisite: Silent Spell, Still Spell
Benefit: Spells cast with this feat require no somatic or verbal components. A caster must still have access to Material, Focus, and Divine Focus components, though these are retrieved/used in an unobtrusive fashion, barring strenuous circumstances (such as if the target of your Sleep spell has confiscated your component pouch and is holding it out of your reach). Otherwise, a spell cast with this feat has no betraying elements, and the only evidence of its presence are the direct effects.
Spells that require an attack roll still require one. The caster must make a Bluff or Sleight of Hand (caster's choice) check opposed by observers' Perception checks to hide his attack roll. Spells and affects like Detect Magic still clearly show the source of the spell as it's being cast.
Level Increase: +2; any spells with no verbal and/or somatic components still yield a +2 spell level increase to gain the benefits of this feat.
Special: Bards cannot fully benefit from this spell, as their spells must always contain Verbal components when applicable. They must therefor make a Bluff check equal to 10 plus the spell's DC to hide their verbal components as merely silly Bard stuff. Bard's don't need to take the Silent Spell feat to meet the prerequisites for this feat.
I'm torn on the Level Increase. Still + Silent = +2, and this feat does that and more, though it's requiring 3 feats to get there. However, some implications (just off the top of my head) seem like a +3 increase would be more appropriate...
I like it. It's going in the right direction.
I would drop all that stuff about bards. Sure, all their spells have a verbal component but nothing in the rulebook (that I know of) says they MUST have a verbal component; it just says they do. Almost all wizard spells have a verbal component but there is no problem using this feat with them, so there is no overt reason to punish bards. What if the bard is a dancer or a mime? I'd just get rid of it as over-complicated and unnecessary.
I think a +3 level bump AND a Bluff check is too much, especially for the third feat in the chain. I would do only one or the other. Your +2 bump with the bluff check is probably fine.
I would also drop Sleight of Hand. That's fine for some components but inappropriate for verbal components. Bluff covers EVERY kind of deception and is not limited to verbal deception so I'd just leave it at Bluff.
That said, making it a skill check seems a bit unfair for the non-CHA casters. Sorcerers and Oracles (etc.) have a big advantage using this feat compared to wizards and other non-CHA casters. Consider a level 10 Sorcerer with a 26 CHA vs. a level 10 wizard with an 8 CHA, that's a difference of +9 on the Bluff check which is a HUUUUUGE difference.
I would consider just making it a caster level check opposed by Perception. There are two outcomes:
1. If it's just d20+CL then the chance of success goes down because no ability score bonus is being applied to the spellcaster. This might be a good thing, making it harder and justifying only a +2 level bump.
2. If it's d20+CL+Primary Casting Stat Mod then the chance of success goes up for most characters (even CHA casters don't always have max ranks in Buff). This might be a good thing, but I might consider that +3 level bump since the check is just a bout a guaranteed success at this point.
A side benefit is that multiclass casters can't just pump ranks into the Bluff skill to be as good with this feat as dedicated casters.
Finally, I would consider taking a trick from Acrobatics and adding +2 to the Perception check for each observer after the first (exactly like adding +2 to the CMD when moving through a space threatened by more than one enemy). While it's easy to hide your hand gestures behind your back and hide your mumbling by turning your head, having more than one observer means some of them might be able to see behind your back... Making the check harder with more observers can be a good model for this difficulty. Besides, it makes it more interesting when casters still need to solve the problem of finding the right time and place to maximize their success, rather than just take the feat and make the roll.
I would drop all that stuff about bards. Sure, all their spells have a verbal component but nothing in the rulebook (that I know of) says they MUST have a verbal component; it just says they do. Almost all wizard spells have a verbal component but there is no problem using this feat with them, so there is no overt reason to punish bards. What if the bard is a dancer or a mime? I'd just get rid of it as over-complicated and unnecessary.
Actually, it's in the description of silent spell. "Special: Bard spells cannot be enhanced by this feat."
I like it. It's going in the right direction.
I would drop all that stuff about bards. Sure, all their spells have a verbal component but nothing in the rulebook (that I know of) says they MUST have a verbal component;
Special: Bard spells cannot be enhanced by this feat.
Ninja'd. But yeah, Silent Spell does not work on Bard spells, sadly. Needing it as a prereq for this feat seems a little wonky because of that, but I suppose Bard's have their own feat for concealing spells.
Silent Spell does not work on Bard spells, sadly. Needing it as a prereq for this feat seems a little wonky because of that, but I suppose Bard's have their own feat for concealing spells.
I don't have a problem with that, really. Some classes are better suited to some feats than others.
With the (semi)new FAQ stating that all spells have obvious elements to the casting process, regardless of components used (or not used), I've made a new Metamagic Feat for the purpose of meeting that very goal.
Hidden Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast spells that go unnoticed by the unwary observer.
Prerequisite: Silent Spell, Still Spell
Benefit: Spells cast with this feat require no somatic or verbal components. A caster must still have access to Material, Focus, and Divine Focus components, though these are retrieved/used in an unobtrusive fashion, barring strenuous circumstances (such as if the target of your Sleep spell has confiscated your component pouch and is holding it out of your reach). Otherwise, a spell cast with this feat has no betraying elements, and the only evidence of its presence are the direct effects.
I think it directly contravenes the intent of the FAQ and is therefore wickedly, wickedly overpowered.
From a game design standpoint, you never want an ability against which there is no defense. The players will scream if you ever use it against them, and if you allow them to use it, they'll run roughshod over your game. This is worse in many regards than a feat that eliminates a saving throw.
I could use it, for example, to make a perfect undetectable assassin. Take a magic item that gives a bonus to Bluff (which are astonishingly cheap to make) and the metamagic reducing traits, then just spam an appropriate attack spell repeatedly.
I would drop all that stuff about bards. Sure, all their spells have a verbal component but nothing in the rulebook (that I know of) says they MUST have a verbal component; it just says they do. Almost all wizard spells have a verbal component but there is no problem using this feat with them, so there is no overt reason to punish bards. What if the bard is a dancer or a mime? I'd just get rid of it as over-complicated and unnecessary.Actually, it's in the description of silent spell. "Special: Bard spells cannot be enhanced by this feat."
Ahhh, forgot about that. Nobody in my group has played a core bard since 3.0 and nobody in my group has used Silent Spell in nearly that long too.
In that case, I'd keep the bard stuff in there, no Silent Spell prereq, make them use the same check as the other classes and let them use this feat.
I could use it, for example, to make a perfect undetectable assassin. Take a magic item that gives a bonus to Bluff (which are astonishingly cheap to make) and the metamagic reducing traits, then just spam an appropriate attack spell repeatedly.
Well, spamming Magic Missile or Disintegrate wold never work since everybody can see that anyway.
Spamming Dominate (type) spells or illusion magic would be useful.
Note that many players have been doing this without even a feat. Charm Person as a level 1 spell, cast it on a guy who watches you cast it, and it still works. Crazy, but I guess many people have been playing it that way - if there is no visible spell effect (like exploding balls of fire) then the spell is invisible and undetectable.
At least this feat grants the same ability but with a three-feat chain, a spell level bump, and a d20 roll to make it work. That's much harder to pull off than the way many people have simply been playing all along.
|
I would personally change your feat in more different way and keep it as "special" or +1 or higher spell slot adjustment increase, here is how.
Hidden Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast spells that go unnoticed by the unwary observer.
Prerequisite: Silent Spell, Still Spell
Benefit: Spells modified by this feat are treated as both Silent and Stilled spells for the purposes of detection. Spells contain no visual betraying elements besides the spell's direct effects (such as fireball). You must still provide the material and focus components for the spell being cast. Spells that require an attack roll, require a successful Spellcraft check opposed by the observer's Perception check to keep this attack roll hidden.
Spells modified by this feat can still be detected as normal through the use of Spellcraft skill or an active magical effect, but you can choose to increase the difficulty of detecting such spell. In such case, the DC to detect hidden spell increases by +5 (up to maximum of +10).
Level Increase: +1 or higher; A hidden spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level. Increasing the DC to detect the hidden spell by +5 increases the spell's adjusted to +2 (up to maximum of +3 for +10 DC increase).
It's a bit long text and English isn't my main language, so some parts could have been probably phrased a bit better, but I believe that this would be cooler, yet not overpowered option of spell. You could likewise still use Still Metamagic feat for additional benefits, but Silent becomes a bit obsolete by it.
Adam
With the (semi)new FAQ stating that all spells have obvious elements to the casting process, regardless of components used (or not used), I've made a new Metamagic Feat for the purpose of meeting that very goal.
Hidden Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast spells that go unnoticed by the unwary observer.
Prerequisite: Silent Spell, Still Spell
Benefit: Spells cast with this feat require no somatic or verbal components. A caster must still have access to Material, Focus, and Divine Focus components, though these are retrieved/used in an unobtrusive fashion, barring strenuous circumstances (such as if the target of your Sleep spell has confiscated your component pouch and is holding it out of your reach). Otherwise, a spell cast with this feat has no betraying elements, and the only evidence of its presence are the direct effects.I think it directly contravenes the intent of the FAQ and is therefore wickedly, wickedly overpowered.
From a game design standpoint, you never want an ability against which there is no defense. The players will scream if you ever use it against them, and if you allow them to use it, they'll run roughshod over your game. This is worse in many regards than a feat that eliminates a saving throw.
I could use it, for example, to make a perfect undetectable assassin. Take a magic item that gives a bonus to Bluff (which are astonishingly cheap to make) and the metamagic reducing traits, then just spam an appropriate attack spell repeatedly.
I'm certainly inclined to agree with you about how unfair it seems to be able to spam offensive spells with no one being able to spot you doing it...but isn't that what anyone utilizing both Still and Silent Spell (1 feat earlier) was able to do before this FAQ anyway?
@DM_Blake: I can always count on you for a healthy numbers breakdown :). I'm following you in your Caster level check vs. Bluff check logic, but this feat is meant to be duplicitous. Just like how a Sorcerer is better equipped to use Charm spells, due to the occasional opposed Cha check required to push the target to do something it might not want to, so to is this feat more appropriate for those used to being sneaky. And anyway, that part's only for spells with attack rolls. Wizards can still have plenty of fun with everything else.
I'm certainly inclined to agree with you about how unfair it seems to be able to spam offensive spells with no one being able to spot you doing it...but isn't that what anyone utilizing both Still and Silent Spell (1 feat earlier) was able to do before this FAQ anyway?With the (semi)new FAQ stating that all spells have obvious elements to the casting process, regardless of components used (or not used), I've made a new Metamagic Feat for the purpose of meeting that very goal.
Hidden Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast spells that go unnoticed by the unwary observer.
Prerequisite: Silent Spell, Still Spell
Benefit: Spells cast with this feat require no somatic or verbal components. A caster must still have access to Material, Focus, and Divine Focus components, though these are retrieved/used in an unobtrusive fashion, barring strenuous circumstances (such as if the target of your Sleep spell has confiscated your component pouch and is holding it out of your reach). Otherwise, a spell cast with this feat has no betraying elements, and the only evidence of its presence are the direct effects.I think it directly contravenes the intent of the FAQ and is therefore wickedly, wickedly overpowered.
From a game design standpoint, you never want an ability against which there is no defense. The players will scream if you ever use it against them, and if you allow them to use it, they'll run roughshod over your game. This is worse in many regards than a feat that eliminates a saving throw.
I could use it, for example, to make a perfect undetectable assassin. Take a magic item that gives a bonus to Bluff (which are astonishingly cheap to make) and the metamagic reducing traits, then just spam an appropriate attack spell repeatedly.
Well, it wasn't clear if they could or not, which is why the FAQ was issued. And the design team were pretty clear that this was not a capacity they wanted players to be able to have. We've both agreed that this is an "unfair" ability.... so it makes a lot more sense simply to disallow it than to make it into a potentially game-breaking feat.
I mean, I could create a homebrew feat like "Master of Dice//Whenever you roll a die, you can turn it so that any number you choose was rolled." But do you really want to validate that behavior?
Well, it wasn't clear if they could or not, which is why the FAQ was issued. And the design team were pretty clear that this was not a capacity they wanted players...I'm certainly inclined to agree with you about how unfair it seems to be able to spam offensive spells with no one being able to spot you doing it...but isn't that what anyone utilizing both Still and Silent Spell (1 feat earlier) was able to do before this FAQ anyway?With the (semi)new FAQ stating that all spells have obvious elements to the casting process, regardless of components used (or not used), I've made a new Metamagic Feat for the purpose of meeting that very goal.
Hidden Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast spells that go unnoticed by the unwary observer.
Prerequisite: Silent Spell, Still Spell
Benefit: Spells cast with this feat require no somatic or verbal components. A caster must still have access to Material, Focus, and Divine Focus components, though these are retrieved/used in an unobtrusive fashion, barring strenuous circumstances (such as if the target of your Sleep spell has confiscated your component pouch and is holding it out of your reach). Otherwise, a spell cast with this feat has no betraying elements, and the only evidence of its presence are the direct effects.I think it directly contravenes the intent of the FAQ and is therefore wickedly, wickedly overpowered.
From a game design standpoint, you never want an ability against which there is no defense. The players will scream if you ever use it against them, and if you allow them to use it, they'll run roughshod over your game. This is worse in many regards than a feat that eliminates a saving throw.
I could use it, for example, to make a perfect undetectable assassin. Take a magic item that gives a bonus to Bluff (which are astonishingly cheap to make) and the metamagic reducing traits, then just spam an appropriate attack spell repeatedly.
I understand that you don't want spellcasters to have this ability, and also that the design team doesn't think they should be able to either.
But this is the House Rule forum, and he's asking us to debate whether it's restricted enough.
And I'm not sure that going against a FAQ is ever "wickedly, wickedly overpowered", just because it's going against a FAQ. A lot of FAQs are ignored by a lot of people, but that doesn't automatically make their games broken.
Also, that example you proposed is obviously ridiculously overpowered, and no one in their right mind would allow it.
Taking three feats (Silent, Still, and this) to be able to cast a spell anonymously (sometimes, with a roll) is not overpowered at all.
OP: I do like the idea of making it a caster level check, plus ability modifier, against perception. This makes it reasonably likely to fail, but also useful enough to work sometimes.
I'm not sure that going against a FAQ is ever "wickedly, wickedly overpowered", just because it's going against a FAQ.
No, it's not just because it's going against a FAQ. But the designers were very clear in this particular FAQ that allowing this capacity is a Bad Idea [tm].
... And you know what? They were right, at least in my opinion, and (by his own admission) in Cuup's as well.
It might help to specify/point out that this doesn't mean people affected by the spell doesn't notice. If you zap someone with a scorching ray they know they're under attack and the direction the spell came from. Similarly if someone makes a save against Charm Person or similar they should realize someone tried to control them, and possibly even (based on the person they briefly felt was their best friend before they shook it off) who that person was.
I think I prefer the overall idea of penalizing opposing Spellcraft ID checks (yet knowing something is being cast) instead of outright making the spell undetectable.
It's fairly simple to create a focused and heavily-optimized Wizard build around this feat and stealth ... that could be extremely problematic in ever being detected at all, by anything!