Social Spells with Verbal Components


Rules Questions


I've come to notice that a lot of social spells (such as Charm Person, Beguiling Gift, etc.) have verbal components. How exactly does that work? How can these spells meant to be used in front of people, in close range, and (supposedly) subtly actually be used properly if you have to essentially shout in order to use them?


Even if you get rid of the verbal component, you are still obviously casting. The answer is that you usually need to isolate people before magicking them, or else use mass spells to target everyone. There are also a few feat chains or prestige class features (enchanting courtesan, mainly) that let you cast in social situations.


QuidEst wrote:
Even if you get rid of the verbal component, you are still obviously casting. The answer is that you usually need to isolate people before magicking them, or else use mass spells to target everyone. There are also a few feat chains or prestige class features (enchanting courtesan, mainly) that let you cast in social situations.

Verbal components are the biggest give away though. you don't even have to be looking at the guy casting a spell to hear that part. If you try to cast charm person on the barkeeper in a crowded tavern, it's the shouting of "THIS IS A SPELL" that's going to give you away not some light jazz hands.


The developers have clarified that the act of casting even a silent, stilled spell has visual manifestations that make it obvious you're casting a spell. They leave the details up to the GM, but suggest that the glowing runes in most spellcasting art are appropriate. So basically you glow like a Christmas tree and can't cast in public secretly without some feats that AR variously bad, expensive, and limited.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spellsong is among the best ways to cast spells socially, if you're a bard or a skald or an evangelist cleric or whatever. Disguise your Charm Person casting as part of a joke you're telling, or your Beguiling Gift as part of a speech you give as you present the present.


Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
The developers have clarified that the act of casting even a silent, stilled spell has visual manifestations that make it obvious you're casting a spell. They leave the details up to the GM, but suggest that the glowing runes in most spellcasting art are appropriate. So basically you glow like a Christmas tree and can't cast in public secretly without some feats that AR variously bad, expensive, and limited.

I forgot about the whole light show; Makes the problem infinitely worse. I guess my deception and deceit oriented witch is pretty harmless now.


The thread Why is it so hard to conceal spellcasting in Pathfinder? seems relevant.

The "light show", if I understand correctly, showed up with Occult Adventures. Psychic magic lacks verbal and somatic components, using thought and emotion components instead. If the verbal and somatic components were the ONLY tells that you're casting, then any user of psychic magic could walk around town curdling people's brains with basically no chance of getting caught.

So the devs bolted on a "manifestation of casting" which has come to be referred to as the "light show". It always struck me as a kludgy workaround. It has made some members of the community quite grumpy, because the feats and such that Paizo has come up with to make it possible to conceal your casting, such as the eponymous Conceal Spell, involve an awful lot of rolls (up to six per spell), and make it very hard to get away with casting on the sly.

I recommend talking to your GM about the matter -- work out between the two of you what you need to do in order to conceal your casting, and how that will work. This is the perfect situation for a house rule. When I was playing a PC with some subtle mind-control spells, my GM required me to take Conceal Spell and then simplified the mechanics to just a Bluff-vs-Perception check.

Bear in mind that it may be possible to conceal your casting in other ways. Example: if you are casting a spell on a sleeping target, and are not observed by anyone else, it's going to be hard for anyone to know you did it. This is handy for spells like Sow Thought and Triggered Suggestion.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think QuidEst is referring too the spell manifestations -- glowing eyes, flashing lights, and the like -- that are present during spell casting given the recent FAQs on this issue.

You can use metamagic to get rid of the vocal component of a spell. But you'll still be showing spell manifestations when you cast.

EDIT: Super-ninja'd on that one...


Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
The developers have clarified that the act of casting even a silent, stilled spell has visual manifestations that make it obvious you're casting a spell. They leave the details up to the GM, but suggest that the glowing runes in most spellcasting art are appropriate. So basically you glow like a Christmas tree and can't cast in public secretly without some feats that AR variously bad, expensive, and limited.

The CORE RULE of the manifestation is that normally, nearby, aware creatures will somehow sense a magical force, and will know the source generating that force.

All spells have a manifestation... but that manifestation does not have to explicitly be limited to a visual cue. In fact, you cannot tie a manifestation to a specific sense because even creatures deprived of that sense will still notice the spellcasting; but you can "add" a sense cue to manifestation for extra effects if you like.

In fact, as it's explained in the FAQ, the exact manifestation form is left to the caster's aesthetics. If your wizard wants visual cues, then she may generate her flashy fireworks while spellcasting; if your Bard prefers some kind of aetheric reberveration of her voice she may chose to do so, and if your Druid wants to suddently start smelling like fresh-cut grass, she may chose that manifestation. But those are just for the show.


That's why you isolate the victim first, then you cast the spell against him offguarded, then you fail the spell and run like an idiot and probably jump through the window never going back again to the village/city goodbye mom goodbye dad I'll miss you all.

Must be fun doing that against a target with his Spellcraft skill trained and then going "haha damn you mischievus ruffian you charmed me, just wait when the spell ends!... but for now, it's party time!"

Doing it while he sleeps (or have been poisoned before) with a bit of luck or the Silent Spell it's the safest way I can think of. Or if it's a dumb target and you can trick him to believe that "I'm gonna cast a luck charm on you sugar" and he falls for it.


Yorien wrote:
Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
The developers have clarified that the act of casting even a silent, stilled spell has visual manifestations that make it obvious you're casting a spell. They leave the details up to the GM, but suggest that the glowing runes in most spellcasting art are appropriate. So basically you glow like a Christmas tree and can't cast in public secretly without some feats that AR variously bad, expensive, and limited.

The CORE RULE of the manifestation is that normally, nearby, aware creatures will somehow sense a magical force, and will know the source generating that force.

All spells have a manifestation... but that manifestation does not have to explicitly be limited to a visual cue. In fact, you cannot tie a manifestation to a specific sense because even creatures deprived of that sense will still notice the spellcasting; but you can "add" a sense cue to manifestation for extra effects if you like.

In fact, as it's explained in the FAQ, the exact manifestation form is left to the caster's aesthetics. If your wizard wants visual cues, then she may generate her flashy fireworks while spellcasting; if your Bard prefers some kind of aetheric reberveration of her voice she may chose to do so, and if your Druid wants to suddently start smelling like fresh-cut grass, she may chose that manifestation. But those are just for the show.

To spellcraft a manifestation you have to actually see the spell, it's in the skill description. There has never been any provision for identifying a spell by hearing the verbal components. While this is the best evidence that it was never components that gave a spell away or were the source of spellcraft it's also evidence that the manifestations need to be visual to be consistent with the spellcraft skill.


Yeah, there is no covertly casting spells without the proper feat investment.

It's big misconception that existed for a very long time and was finally clarified right before Ultimate Intrigue book was released. In that book are options to help you hide spell casting.


When, on a cloudless day
Two wheels, squeak into view
And the stranger, cart filled high
With umbrellas
Arrives


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

Haiku are pretty
but sometimes they don't make sense.
Refrigerator.

Scarab Sages

Vollg wrote:
I've come to notice that a lot of social spells (such as Charm Person, Beguiling Gift, etc.) have verbal components. How exactly does that work? How can these spells meant to be used in front of people, in close range, and (supposedly) subtly actually be used properly if you have to essentially shout in order to use them?

So you, the sorcerer use the spell, and your 3-5 companions stand around looking menacing. Most people look the other way.

Granted, you're a villian at this step. A true hero would just use normal diplomacy....

But yeah, the main way to use spells like charm person in crowds is to have a reputation - either as a scary person or as a person who is protected by a scary person.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Social Spells with Verbal Components All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.