Here's my basic interpretation of the rules:
Emanations function as a continual burst, meaning that creatures, objects, etc. with total cover from the origin point of the emanation are unaffected.
Fireball, as a burst spell, could thus be avoided via total cover. However, that cover would taken the damage first and potentially dissipate - thus hiding behind a big sheet of parchment wouldn't work as total cover. A particularly nasty fireball might even blow through a tower shield. Doesn't particularly effect emanations that don't deal damage.
Emanations are like auras. They exude from a specific point and affect all things within their aura's radiance. Auras can be detected using Detect Magic. These auras can be blocked by 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt.
That means that in the instance of a backpack, the silenced coin would still pop up on Detect Magic. That strikes me as the spell still having some influence beyond the container. Magical energies are penetrating that which contains the spell.
So, I would rule that in order to qualify as cover against a burst/emanation the cover has to a) be able to survive the effect (if the blast does damage) and b) the cover must be sufficient to also block Detect Magic.
|
Just looking at the other side of the coin (as it were...), Instead of casting Silence on a copper piece, cast Light on it. Place it into a regular leather backpack. Is the emanation blocked?Seems like non-dimensional space would always block line of effect. I'm not as sure about a mundane backpack though.I suppose the question could be made as to whether or not a hat, backpack, or shoe would provide "total cover". It would provide complete concealment, but this is not exactly the same thing. Hmm.Right...not the same thing. Cover is granted by solid objects completly blocking both line of sight and line of effect (e.g. wall, closed door, overturned table, tree trunk, etc.) Concealment is granted by stuff that blocks line of sight but NOT line of effect (e.g. fog, darkness, dense foliage, etc.) Strange exceptions do occur, such as transparent objects not blocking line of sight but still providing cover, but I would think a leather bag (extra-dimensional or not) is sufficiently opaque to qualify as granting cover.
The light spell is not a magical emanation. The spell causes an object to glow. The spell effect is on the object, the light is actually NOT the spell effect.
light
Range: Touch
Target: Object Touched
So light is a horrible example.
Drop a delayed blast fireball into a leather backpack. Close it. Does it block line of effect?
I'm actually thinking that in both instances it might.
Ultimately it's a judgement call with non-light spells. Personally I don't think a normally constructed pack would prevent an burst or an emanation effect since it's too 'leaky'. If you designed a pack with thicker leather and special clasps to prevent emanations maybe.
|
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. A burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends.
An emanation spell functions like a burst spell, except that the effect continues to radiate from the point of origin for the duration of the spell. Most emanations are cones or spheres.
Yes, a tower shield will protect you from Silence if you use it to provide total cover (assuming the shield is between you and the point of emanation).
The examples of Light and Continual Flame are bad examples because they are not spells defined with an "Area" entry... they are not emanations as defined by the rules. Use common sense when determining if something "blocks" the light generated by those spells.
EDIT: And upon further review it appears as if several other posters have pointed this out about Light and Continual Flame. My bad.
|
Good catch all on Light and Continual Flame. Not emanations.
I've been thinking about blocking effects.
The thin sheet of lead/x thickness of other material seems a good practical dividing line.
I was thinking in terms of hardness/hit points.
Now I'm thinking about wizards and lead lined hats.
"They're to block the magic that's messing with my head, man...."
or really big lead lined hats that you can crawl into when the dragon comes...
"That's some big hat..."
I just happened to recall a strip of KotDT on an Invisible Helmet against Gaze Attacks... LOL
|
|
Good catch all on Light and Continual Flame. Not emanations.
I've been thinking about blocking effects.
The thin sheet of lead/x thickness of other material seems a good practical dividing line.
I was thinking in terms of hardness/hit points.
Now I'm thinking about wizards and lead lined hats.
"They're to block the magic that's messing with my head, man...."
or really big lead lined hats that you can crawl into when the dragon comes...
"That's some big hat..."
That's an interesting idea for a magic item, a wizard's had that projects a donut shaped plane of force (the hole for the head) giving the wizard full cover from attacks from above.
My simple rule of thumb on cover versus concealment is whether you can shoot an arrow through something.
|
|
Silence (as in the spell) is borked. It causes no shortage of headaches wherever I game. Everyone has a different take on how it functions.
Why if blindness/deafness are coupled together, aren't darkness/silence not in treated the same way? Why is interfering with light(waves) an evocation while interfering with sound (waves) an illusion(glamer)?
It seems to me that they should work in similar fashions, which is why I have long ago house ruled this spell.
YMMV
PS If the silence can be blocked by being hidden within a backpack, stoppered bottle or the like, as some have suggested. Couldn't the enemy just pick up the silenced object and secure it the same way?
Or just throw it back? :)
I love the way these kind of conversations degenerate into silliness.
An emanation (like a burst) does not go around corners to affect something on the other side, so a tree trunk will protect you from BOTH a fireball and a silence spell. In the same way, the heel of a boot will protect the wearer from a silenced coin, and it will protect him from the fireball...until the shoe has taken 2 hp of damage, the sock 1 hp, and then the leg takes all the rest. Damaging bursts and emanations will inflict their damage on interposing barriers, and if the barrier is destroyed in the process, then the burst/emanation continues unabated.
Placing a silenced coin into a backpack will cover that coin and prevent the emanation from affecting creatures outside the pack (assuming the thing is closed). Now, if you really want to get into the hair-splitting of "leaky seams," "loose flaps," and all that...well, more power to you. Casting a fireball into a backpack will save you the 2 hp that the leather absorbs before being reduced to cinders, and then you take all the rest.
There really isn't much to it.
What is all this with the silence coin vs. light coin? It's two different things.
Light is composed of particles moving in waves. Silence is an absence of other kinds of waves.
If you cast Light on a coin, that coin does not radiate magic; it raidiates light. The magic never leaves the coin. There are no magic beams eminating out from the coin. Just particles moving in waves. That's why your backpack will block the light, and that's why the analogy doesn't matter.
But if you cast Silence on a coin, it does not radiate a lack of sound waves; it radiates a magical effect that surppresses sound waves in the area of effect. The magic does "leave" the coin as it spreads out to fill the area of effect. In this case there are magic "beams" (or something) eminating out from the coin.
Two different things.
It's a very good question to ask whether the magic "beams" of silence can eminate through a backpack, burqa, pointy hat, bullseye lantern, etc.
But it's not a relevant question in any way to compare it to light beams.
I think that whether an emanation/burst/light-source has its line of effect blocked depends on what is doing the blocking.
We would apply RL knowledge to determine if a light source is dimmed or entirely blocked by a covering, since rules detailed enough to give all objects and thicknesses there-of a light penetration rating would be overly cumbersome. The same with an explosion of fire; I wouldn't think catching a delayed blast fireball in a bag would have any effect on the spell. So, if the cover would block all sound, it will protect your sounds from being silenced, otherwise, it would still have an effect.
What's left for DM interpretation is if being in an interdimensional space would block screams (entirely up to DM afaik), or explosions (bag of holdings probably don't since sharp objects can cut them open), or light?
|
|
See? This is what I am talking about. :)
I'm not sure that I am on board with the sound suppression angle DM_Blake. ;) If that were the case, why is it labelled an illusion as opposed to evocation? Or transmutation for that matter?
Why is darkness not allowed to be targeted on an individual like silence is?
Why does darkness have a counter in light but silence has no corresponding counter spell?
Why does light/dark have degrees or gradients that effect perception in tangible (read specific + to or - to) ways while sound (or lack thereof, do not? Couldn't an extremely noisy environment not give you a negative to your perception skill. Or perhaps interfere with your ability to communicate?
etc
etc
etc
Like I have said before. Vision is king in this game... sound the weak sister and the rest of the senses hardly matter at all.
Cheers!
Why if blindness/deafness are coupled together, aren't darkness/silence not in treated the same way? Why is interfering with light(waves) an evocation while interfering with sound (waves) an illusion(glamer)?
Blindness/deafness disrupts a single target's biology. Completely unrelated to darkness or silence, even if the effect for that target is similar.
Darkness in D&D is not "interfering with light waves." Let go of real-world physics for this one, including the idea of both particles and waves. Light and darkness function as opposite forces, not a saturation continuum. (Note that heat and cold are treated the same way.) So the darkness spell doesn't suppress light, it actually radiates darkness -- a distinct energy which opposes light. Radiating a type of energy is evocation's bread and butter.
Illusion manipulates perceptible qualities. Glamers do so in a "real" way, as opposed to a "just in your head" way. This is less about the details of how sounds might be carried through the underlying phlogiston, and more about the fact that illusionists already know how to manipulate them, starting with ghost sound at level 0.
|
|
PS If the silence can be blocked by being hidden within a backpack, stoppered bottle or the like, as some have suggested. Couldn't the enemy just pick up the silenced object and secure it the same way?
Or just throw it back? :)
You can just pick up a silenced coin and throw it back and any way you can suppress an effect the enemy can as well assuming he has access to it.
|
|
I love the way these kind of conversations degenerate into silliness.
An emanation (like a burst) does not go around corners to affect something on the other side, so a tree trunk will protect you from BOTH a fireball and a silence spell.
Fireball is a "spread" area spell... it goes around corners and trees.
By the rules, your clothing or a backpack or a boot doesn't provide cover so those would be ineffective versus Silence or Fireball in any case.
I agree that a handy haversack would block a Silenced coin simply because once the coin is in the haversack and the sack is closed, it exists in an enclosed extradimensional space. I suppose the spell might "spill out" of the haversack when it was opened, since opening the haversack effectively creates a portal between dimensions that the emanation could travel through.
Or maybe not. :)
** spoiler omitted **
FYI, Pulling the coin out is a move action.
Another common tactic in our group is to cast silence of an object near the target in question. "I cast silence on a pebble on the ground at his feet" Since the items is unattended, no save is allowed. Unless the DM does some serious NPC metagaming, the NPC won't know if the silence is on them or on something near them.
Metagaming has nothing to do with it - the complete, sudden and utter silence is a clear effect in and of itself. While a creature without Spellcraft or Knowlege (arcana) may not know specifically about that silence, that they cannot hear or speak anything is about as subtle has getting hit in the face with a pillow.
Fireball is a "spread" area spell... it goes around corners and trees.
It is. Whoops.
I think the difference between cover and concealment is based on whether the material can stop the effect.
A sheet of cloth vs a fireball or arrow would be concealment, because the cloth would be destroyed by even a small amount of damage, but vs a silence spell(or any other effect that deals no damage), a sheet of cloth would be cover and block line of effect.
Another way to look at it.
A 2 inch thick brick wall(8 hardness, 30 hp) is generally considered cover, but against a particularly strong attack like a a war machine, it may only be considered concealment because the attack is capable of going through the wall and hitting what is behind it.
** spoiler omitted **
FYI, Pulling the coin out is a move action.
Another common tactic in our group is to cast silence of an object near the target in question. "I cast silence on a pebble on the ground at his feet" Since the items is unattended, no save is allowed. Unless the DM does some serious NPC metagaming, the NPC won't know if the silence is on them or on something near them.
Metagaming has nothing to do with it - the complete, sudden and utter silence is a clear effect in and of itself. While a creature without Spellcraft or Knowlege (arcana) may not know specifically about that silence, that they cannot hear or speak anything is about as subtle has getting hit in the face with a pillow.
It is metagaming to know that the effect was cast on an object near you vs being cast on you.
In short, how do you know it wasn't cast on you, and you just failed your save? Because you didn't get a saving throw?
|
|
Blindness/deafness disrupts a single target's biology...Darkness in D&D is not "interfering with light waves."...
Illusion manipulates perceptible qualities...
I completely understand where you are going with all this... but it leads me to question why you get no save to resist the "influence" of the illusion. In other words, the darkness is a "real, tangible" thing that works against light. Therefore no save is allowed by an observer as they are not in fact, the actual target of the spell. Light itself is. The fact that silence is classified as an illusion implies that the observer is a target of the spell (at least incidentally). And yet no save. The silence spell continues to function (ie allowing no sound to even pass through its area of effect) even when there is no observer to influence.
Two people can be on opposite sides of the silenced area and cannot communicate through the area. How is this an illusion? It seems more in line with the way darkness is working with light.
Am I making sense?
This spell has always been a pet peeve of mine. :)
Cheers
It is metagaming to know that the effect was cast on an object near you vs being cast on you.
In short, how do you know it wasn't cast on you, and you just failed your save? Because you didn't get a saving throw?
Actually, per the core rules, you know something happened if you make a save against a targetted spell. If you're targetting a person then it is a tergetted spell. If he makes his save, he knows he was the target of magical energy.
While it doesn't explicitly state it, it's very reasonable to assume he also knows he was the target if he fails his save. They probably didn't state it since most targetted spells are extremely obvious. If you fall asleep, turn into a toad, become a statue, or have wounds burst out of your flesh, you're going to know something happened; no need to write a rule about it. Silence is a corner case, but I doubt that the lack of a rule about knowing when you fail a save means that your failed save gives you less information than you would have gotten from a successful save.
|
|
I think the difference between cover and concealment is based on whether the material can stop the effect.
A sheet of cloth vs a fireball or arrow would be concealment, because the cloth would be destroyed by even a small amount of damage, but vs a silence spell(or any other effect that deals no damage), a sheet of cloth would be cover and block line of effect.
So I have a kercheif around my mouth and never worry about silence again.
Woo Hoo!!
Fireball is a "spread" area spell... it goes around corners and trees.By the rules, your clothing or a backpack or a boot doesn't provide cover so those would be ineffective versus Silence or Fireball in any case.
I agree that a handy haversack would block a Silenced coin simply because once the coin is in the haversack and the sack is closed, it exists in an enclosed extradimensional space. I suppose the spell might "spill out" of the haversack when it was opened, since opening the haversack effectively creates a portal between dimensions that the emanation could travel through.
Or maybe not. :)
I can start getting on board with the idea that an extradimensional space can suppress an emanation spell as you describe.
I'm still not ok with it being suppressed by a mundane backpack, or a shoe, or a hat, or anything along the lines of "if I hide it, it no longer works". A second level spell shouldn't be beaten by a hankie.
So, I would rule that in order to qualify as cover against a burst/emanation the cover has to a) be able to survive the effect (if the blast does damage) and b) the cover must be sufficient to also block Detect Magic.
The above ruling is my favorite so far. It also accounts for a tower shield.
So all I have to do to provide light for the party is to put it on a coin, and then I can keep the coin in my backpack, or my pocket, and I'm good?
For Eben... Is that a coin glowing in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?
By the rules, your clothing or a backpack or a boot doesn't provide cover so those would be ineffective versus Silence or Fireball in any case.I agree that a handy haversack would block a Silenced coin simply because once the coin is in the haversack and the sack is closed, it exists in an enclosed extradimensional space. I suppose the spell might "spill out" of the haversack when it was opened, since opening the haversack effectively creates a portal between dimensions that the emanation could travel through.
That's how I see it. As long as the haversack/hole is closed said offending coin would not even be on the same plane of existance. *shrug*
Haywards Handy Haversack's description says it's airtight. It says anyone in it will start to suffocate. If a tower shield blocks emanations it's because it stops the caster from targeting whoever tossed the silence spell. An arrow slit is not complete cover.
The fact that silence is classified as an illusion implies that the observer is a target of the spell (at least incidentally).
In this case, it actually doesn't. Glamers are not mind-affecting. Again, this is a situation where a real-world understanding of physics gets in the way. :)
A better way to rationalize many areas of D&D "physics" is from the perspective of Platonic forms. (I think there's a similar concept in Chinese calligraphy, but I'm no expert there.) Things cannot be described as simply the sum of their interactions with other things, and are not always reducible to component parts. Objects have a primal truth to them; they have shape and color independent of the light which reveals those properties. Their physical description, the way they smell and feel, the noises they make, are all part of their form -- their core nature -- in a mystical or even divine sense.
The figment and glamer subschools of illusion magic call upon those primal forms, superimposing them upon reality. These likenesses have all the perceptible properties of the real thing, lacking only the substance: in a Platonic sense they are actually more real than a physical object, closer to the true nature of a form because they are complete in themselves, not subject to disruption by other things.
A figment is really there. You get a disbelief save because it's too pure to interact with you physically, and if you know this you can safely ignore it. But it doesn't vanish, you're just aware that you can walk through it. Since glamers obscure real things, there's no benefit to disbelieving them -- the thing is still obscured -- and that's why there's no save on silence! :)
|
** spoiler omitted **
FYI, Pulling the coin out is a move action.
Another common tactic in our group is to cast silence of an object near the target in question. "I cast silence on a pebble on the ground at his feet" Since the items is unattended, no save is allowed. Unless the DM does some serious NPC metagaming, the NPC won't know if the silence is on them or on something near them.
If I was your DM I would make you make a perception roll. For you to notice a pebble at someones feet in a field of grass.. much less a dank and dark dungeon is going to be difficult and since it is your action that is causing the perception roll it is a standard action just to do a perception roll. Also if the NPC caster in which you are casting the silence spell at or near by should be able to tell by a simple spellcraft roll if the spell was cast ON them or NEAR them. Not Metagaming. Spellcasters are not stupid nor should they be made out to be.
Detect magic works through stone walls. Emanations don't go through walls.
Detect Magic is an emanation...
Another common tactic in our group is to cast silence of an object near the target in question....If I was your DM I would make you make a perception roll. For you to notice a pebble at someones feet in a field of grass...
Of course the best way to go is to cary a bag of sand of gravel with you, target one stone or grain for the silence and then throw a whole handful at the intended area. Your target may know that one of the stones or grains has a silence spell on them but no way to know which without detect magic.
Avoids the perception check and saves nicely with a small bit of preparation. And stones or sand grains sink into terrain like grass or weeds and are harder to find than a coin that is not normal for the area.
Unless your fighting on a dragon's hoard. Then use the coin.
** spoiler omitted **
FYI, Pulling the coin out is a move action.
Another common tactic in our group is to cast silence of an object near the target in question. "I cast silence on a pebble on the ground at his feet" Since the items is unattended, no save is allowed. Unless the DM does some serious NPC metagaming, the NPC won't know if the silence is on them or on something near them.
Metagaming has nothing to do with it - the complete, sudden and utter silence is a clear effect in and of itself. While a creature without Spellcraft or Knowlege (arcana) may not know specifically about that silence, that they cannot hear or speak anything is about as subtle has getting hit in the face with a pillow.
It is metagaming to know that the effect was cast on an object near you vs being cast on you.
In short, how do you know it wasn't cast on you, and you just failed your save? Because you didn't get a saving throw?
Ah - good point, and no, they wouldn't know the precise point of origin without the proper methods (arcane sight, true seeing + Spellcraft for example). I meant that they would have no problem recognizing the silence for what it is easily enough! ^_^
|
|
A lot of intelligent things!
I'm following you... barely! :)
What I am sure about is that none of this is removing my strong dislike for the spells mechanics! XD
In all seriousness though, why does "D&D physics" work the way it does with light and darkness and not the same in other areas? That is really the crux of my contention. Why is sound treated by "rules" revolving around illusion, while light and dark are not. It would seem an obvious fit that light and dark should also follow the rules of illusion then no?
You also then have some people who purpose that the silence effect can be blocked with a tower shield. My suspension of disbelief can only be stretched so far...
Thanks for the interesting chat!
Cheers
In all seriousness though, why does "D&D physics" work the way it does with light and darkness and not the same in other areas?
Quite simply: because different rules were written by different people at different times, or even by the same person trying to make room for multiple fictional sources. There are probably half a dozen sets of metaphysics just in the major portions of the game setting (magic, cosmology, etc.), and sometimes they're incompatible, and sometimes this is obvious. It's a thirty year legacy, and while efforts have been made to clean things up from time to time, nobody's ever poked into every corner so here and there you'll find dust and cobwebs.
One pair of tools in every GM's collection, therefore, must be a broom and a carpet. ;)
Question = If you are in an extra-dimensional can/does sound travel beyond that space. Answer = NO.
Question = If you are in a normal leather backpack can/does sound travel beyond that space. Answer = Yes.
Can the GM rule that being in a backpack reduce the area of effect = Yes.
Can the PC rule that being in a backpack reduce the area of effect = NO.
|
|
On a sidenote:
One of my favoured house rules is that:
- Any spell caster may attempt to cast a spell without verbal components by making a DC 15 + spell level caster level check (casters with the Silent Spell feat gain a +4 bonus on this check).
Otherwise the silence spell is just too rigid (and to a degree too powerful) in its effect for a 2nd level cleric spell.
Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
|
|
Detect magic works through stone walls. Emanations don't go through walls.Detect Magic is an emanation...
Except it is an exemption to the rule.
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. A burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends.
An emanation spell functions like a burst spell, except that the effect continues to radiate from the point of origin for the duration of the spell. Most emanations are cones or spheres.
If you have total cover an emanation does not work. It's pretty clear.
Detect magic is an exception that specifically calls out that it works through walls, etc.
The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it.
Detect magic works through stone walls. Emanations don't go through walls.Detect Magic is an emanation...Except it is an exemption to the rule.
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. A burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends.
An emanation spell functions like a burst spell, except that the effect continues to radiate from the point of origin for the duration of the spell. Most emanations are cones or spheres.
If you have total cover an emanation does not work. It's pretty clear.
Detect magic is an exception that specifically calls out that it works through walls, etc.
The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it.
I never knew it went through walls. It may have just passed the barrier into first level spell, or since my players don't know about it I can keep running it without letting it go through walls.
|
|
I never knew it went through walls. It may have just passed the barrier into first level spell, or since my players don't know about it I can keep running it without letting it go through walls.
Yeah, I've basically house ruled that anytime someone has deliberately hidden treasure they line the case with lead
|
|
Another common tactic in our group is to cast silence of an object near the target in question....If I was your DM I would make you make a perception roll. For you to notice a pebble at someones feet in a field of grass...Of course the best way to go is to cary a bag of sand of gravel with you, target one stone or grain for the silence and then throw a whole handful at the intended area. Your target may know that one of the stones or grains has a silence spell on them but no way to know which without detect magic.
Avoids the perception check and saves nicely with a small bit of preparation. And stones or sand grains sink into terrain like grass or weeds and are harder to find than a coin that is not normal for the area.
Unless your fighting on a dragon's hoard. Then use the coin.
A bag of sand would work and I would not argue as a DM. What I was saying though is for someone to notice a pebble or something at the spellcasters feet to cast silence on where the enemy caster would possibly not know it is on him so that they can not move out of it is incorrect. And would allow a spellcraft check to see if they know if it was cast directly on them in which they would not be able to move out of it or if it was cast on an object or in space as the spell mentions and in which case the caster can move out of it.
The above is what the person was asking and talking about that I quoted in my previous post.
Except it is an exemption to the rule.
If you have total cover an emanation does not work. It's pretty clear.Detect magic is an exception that specifically calls out that it works through walls, etc.
I'm not convinced it's as cut and dry as you seem to suggest. In order for an emanation to have line of effect it cannot pass through 'a solid barrier' - unless it is one of the 1/3 of emanation spells in the Core Rulebook that specifically say that it can. The question here is what constitutes a 'solid barrier' to an emanation.
By the rules on page 215, it cannot have a 1 square foot worth of non-solid area per 5 feet of barrier. But it still doesn't specify the composition of that barrier.
I contest that any material that would fail to block magical emanations from Detect Magic in any way shouldn't be considered 'solid barriers'. Perhaps following the numbers quoted in the descriptions for the various detect emanations is harsh, but considering the infrequency of functional, intact stone dungeon walls of less than 1 foot of thickness, I don't think the discrepancy will emerge that often.
I honestly can't imagine an instance of an argument ever popping up except in the case of attempted exploitation of the rules. In general, what constitutes a barrier is fairly intuitive. In game, it could be argued that 'solid' implies 'hardness' or some such. In whatever case, the GM says what's what, and that's what.
I cast Silence on this coin, then I...
...put it into the jukebox. Crying Terran cowboys all around!
My take on silence is that the item you placed the coin into could block SOUND then it could block SILENCE as well. Put an hifi within a bag and the music would be heard, unless the backpack is so thick as to being soundproof. Same with glass or stone, I could hear my neighborhoods shouting even if I am under total cover (sigh).
Detect magic works through stone walls. Emanations don't go through walls.Detect Magic is an emanation...Except it is an exemption to the rule.
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. A burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends.
An emanation spell functions like a burst spell, except that the effect continues to radiate from the point of origin for the duration of the spell. Most emanations are cones or spheres.
If you have total cover an emanation does not work. It's pretty clear.
Detect magic is an exception that specifically calls out that it works through walls, etc.
The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it.
I don't see Detect Magic as an exemption to the rules, but rather a spell where the difference between cover and concealment is clearly defined.
Total cover stops the detect magic emanation. For divination spells, cover is 3 feet of stone, or a thin sheet of lead. Anything less than that is merely concealment.
As for silence, I think cover would be anything thick enough to stop sound or just use the same rules as divinations(3 ft of stone/sheet of lead).
It is metagaming to know that the effect was cast on an object near you vs being cast on you.
In short, how do you know it wasn't cast on you, and you just failed your save? Because you didn't get a saving throw?
Actually, per the core rules, you know something happened if you make a save against a targetted spell. If you're targetting a person then it is a tergetted spell. If he makes his save, he knows he was the target of magical energy.
While it doesn't explicitly state it, it's very reasonable to assume he also knows he was the target if he fails his save. They probably didn't state it since most targetted spells are extremely obvious. If you fall asleep, turn into a toad, become a statue, or have wounds burst out of your flesh, you're going to know something happened; no need to write a rule about it. Silence is a corner case, but I doubt that the lack of a rule about knowing when you fail a save means that your failed save gives you less information than you would have gotten from a successful save.
By the RAW, you only know a spell hit you if you make the save. Otherwise spells like charm person would be useless.
Player: I cast charm person
NPC:(fails save) Hey I kinda like you, but wait you just put a spell on me!!!!!
Now if the spell has an obvious visual effect like fireball, then you will know you got hit with a spell either way.
A guard who falls asleep at his post. Maybe his drink was spiked, maybe it was a sleep spell, or maybe he was just more tired than he thought.
In the case of silence, you would know you are in an area of silence, but you would not know if the spell was cast on you or not.
Fireball is a "spread" area spell... it goes around corners and trees.It is. Whoops.
Well sonuvacrap...why have I been playing it as a burst all these years? Huh...
OK...forget fireball then; the point still stands, even if the example provided was faulty. An emanation acts like a burst, which is blocked by things that provide cover, which a backpack (or handy haversack would provide, and so the effect would not penetrate to affect creatures on the outside.
At best, one might reasonably argue that loose flaps would allow for the effect to seep out at some given angle (which is the basis for the bulls-eye "silence" lantern idea), but if closed up nice and tight, there would be no effect.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
Well sonuvacrap...why have I been playing it as a burst all these years? Huh...OK...forget fireball then; the point still stands, even if the example provided was faulty. An emanation acts like a burst, which is blocked by things that provide cover, which a backpack (or handy haversack would provide, and so the effect would not penetrate to affect creatures on the outside.
At best, one might reasonably argue that loose flaps would allow for the effect to seep out at some given angle (which is the basis for the bulls-eye "silence" lantern idea), but if closed up nice and tight, there would be no effect.
No.
There are too many people disagreeing with this ruling for you to make your post as if it were fact with no further discussion required. Although for me the discussion is nearly done; I'm satisfied with my earlier statements and I'm not sure I'll come up with a new and improved argument 2.0.
Refer to all the statements regarding burqas, hats, shoes and umbrellas. Aren't these silly? If you rule that the emanation can be hidden from a person (with only fabric or leather), then couldn't the person be hidden from the emanation (by...clothing?)? My opinion is that this is an exploit and would allow a second level spell to be defeated by a hat.
|
|
I don't see Detect Magic as an exemption to the rules, but rather a spell where the difference between cover and concealment is clearly defined.
Cover is a fairly well defined term in the book. It doesn't change based on the effect. The game is convoluted enough without taking defined terms and extending them to make them more complex. While it doesn't take things like backpacks into account it clearly put walls into the realm of cover.
|
|
Except it is an exemption to the rule.
If you have total cover an emanation does not work. It's pretty clear.Detect magic is an exception that specifically calls out that it works through walls, etc.
I'm not convinced it's as cut and dry as you seem to suggest. In order for an emanation to have line of effect it cannot pass through 'a solid barrier' - unless it is one of the 1/3 of emanation spells in the Core Rulebook that specifically say that it can. The question here is what constitutes a 'solid barrier' to an emanation.
By the rules on page 215, it cannot have a 1 square foot worth of non-solid area per 5 feet of barrier. But it still doesn't specify the composition of that barrier.
I contest that any material that would fail to block magical emanations from Detect Magic in any way shouldn't be considered 'solid barriers'. Perhaps following the numbers quoted in the descriptions for the various detect emanations is harsh, but considering the infrequency of functional, intact stone dungeon walls of less than 1 foot of thickness, I don't think the discrepancy will emerge that often.
I honestly can't imagine an instance of an argument ever popping up except in the case of attempted exploitation of the rules. In general, what constitutes a barrier is fairly intuitive. In game, it could be argued that 'solid' implies 'hardness' or some such. In whatever case, the GM says what's what, and that's what.
I agree, it's not very cut and dried. Detect magic IMO is a bad precedent is all I'm saying. If thin stone walls don't block magical emanations then you get situations where clerics are channelling through walls.
It's much much simpler to assume one definition of cover rather than varying your definition based on the effect when things are in a gray area I tend to stick to the path of simplicity.
Can you shoot an arrow through it? If yes then it's concealment not cover.
Works for arrows, swords, spells, you name it.
I don't see Detect Magic as an exemption to the rules, but rather a spell where the difference between cover and concealment is clearly defined.Cover is a fairly well defined term in the book. It doesn't change based on the effect. The game is convoluted enough without taking defined terms and extending them to make them more complex. While it doesn't take things like backpacks into account it clearly put walls into the realm of cover.
Cover vs concealment depends on the wall and the weapon.
A 1 inch thick stone wall(8 hardness/15 hp) will stop an arrow easily, but it probably won't stop a rock from a trebuchet.
There are rules for what blocks line of effect for a divination spell. Unfortunately, there is no such definition for spells from other schools, thus we are into the realm of DM adjudication.
So, we can either extend the rules for divinations to all magical effects. IE a sheet of lead will block a silence spell effect, and thus putting a silenced coin into a lead lined backpack would stop the effect.
or
We can create some other objective term for what stop the effect on a spell by spell basis. IE silence is a sound based effect, and thus anything that stops sound would stop the silence effect.
or
Create your own, since there is no RAW on what blocks line of effect for a silence spell your made up rule is as good as mine.