The Adventurer's Handbook has a feat called "Secret Spell" that lets you conceal your spellcasting. It requires 5 ranks in Bluff, but I don't remember the specific details; I don't think it lets you avoid AoO, but it would conceal out-of-combat spellcasting. However, it's something to work with if you want to make the ability to hide your spellcasting feat-specific. Personally, I hate making everything rely on feats, so I'd make it skill-based--Bluff opposed by Spellcraft, maybe?
The RAW/RAI issue is actually fairly clear. Every action takes so much time to accomplish and there's no mechanic to combine spell casting with a bluff check or feint.
It's from 3.5, but if I remember correctly, there was a Skill Trick (out of Complete Scoundrel) which allowed, with a high enough bluff check, the ability to completely disguise spell casting. I don't have the books handy at the moment, but I remember wanting it really badly for a wizard I was playing.
This may have been covered here already, or elsewhere in the rules, but do spells that take up a Swift action, without being officially Quickened (such as by using Battle Blessing from 3.5's Complete Champion) avoid AoOs?
Completely false. If they aren't casting a spell, they are usually just standing there. So pretty much, should they provoke an attack of opportunity by just being involved in the middle of melee? There is a huge level of disconnect right there. I mean, how is your fighter supposed to know a spell is about to go off when there are no arcane words happening or funny hand gestures? Did the fighter get an AoO because the character looked constipated?
Someone in melee is presumed to be actively defending himself. While casting a spell, even a still and silent spell, the caster is no longer defending himself - and thus, the attack of opportunity.
MI
This may have been covered here already, or elsewhere in the rules, but do spells that take up a Swift action, without being officially Quickened (such as by using Battle Blessing from 3.5's Complete Champion) avoid AoOs?
3.5, I have no clue.. there were so many rules across so many books I'm sure you can find a rule for the type of action is scratching your nose in combat and whether or not it provokes...
As for Paizo:
Cast a Quickened Spell
You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell feat), or any spell whose casting time is designated as a free or swift action, as a swift action. Only one such spell can be cast in any round, and such spells don't count toward your normal limit of one spell per round. Casting a spell as a swift action doesn't incur an attack of opportunity.
-S
You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell feat), or any spell whose casting time is designated as a free or swift action, as a swift action. Only one such spell can be cast in any round, and such spells don't count toward your normal limit of one spell per round. Casting a spell as a swift action doesn't incur an attack of opportunity.
-S
Thanks. I thought I had read that somewhere, but couldn't recall.
Along a parallel vein to the OP, can a stilled, silented spell be counterspelled?
How about the Spellcraft check to identify during casting? Or would an observer only get the spellcraft check to identify after the spell's been cast? Would they get a check at all?
Along a parallel vein to the OP, can a stilled, silented spell be counterspelled?
How about the Spellcraft check to identify during casting? Or would an observer only get the spellcraft check to identify after the spell's been cast? Would they get a check at all?
By the rules it can be spellcrafted IIRC. There was a thread on this a while back, which is when this issue first came up. If nobody finds the link I will check for it when I get back home to see if I can find the answer.
PS:The official answer is that there is no answer and that for now it is up to the DM
Hey there Everybody,
The rules here are certainly not clear, because they generally assume that the act of casting a spell has some noticeable element. Notice I did not say component, because I think the rules are silent on parts of spellcasting that are codified components versus those that occur without any sort of codification, such as the wiggle of a finger, change in breathing and other flavor bits that happen when a spellcaster makes the magic happen, as it were.
Back to the topic at hand, since the rules are silent here, I think it is well within the GMs purview to impose a penalty to the Spellcraft check to identify a spell without components (V, S, M). Since there is no real increase for spells with just one, I would guess that this penalty is not very large, perhaps only as much as -4.
This is, of course, up to your GM to adjudicate.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo PublishingEdit: I should also note that I also agree with James, that a strict reading of the rules says you can make the check, without penalty, regardless of the spell's components.
Along a parallel vein to the OP, can a stilled, silented spell be counterspelled?
How about the Spellcraft check to identify during casting? Or would an observer only get the spellcraft check to identify after the spell's been cast? Would they get a check at all?
I would argue that if the spell has a material component, an opposed caster could still attempt the Spellcraft check if they noticed: either a penalized Spellcraft check or a preliminary Perception check to notice the quick rummage for the component.
If there is no component being used, I'd say that, no, you cannot attempt to identify the spell since there is nothing to indicate that a spell is occurring until it goes off, unless the observing caster has Detect Magic or a similar effect running that would allow them to notice the actual spell energies coalescing or whatever.
|
I'm among the school of silent+still do not prevent AoO
you might win the surprise round (meaning that oppenent is flat footed and cannot AoO unless he has combat reflex)
you're also identified as casting an unidentifiable spell (no spellcraft check, unless material component) only school could be identified if true seeing or detect magic with concentration.
you don't have to make concentration check if grappled (but I think this is covered in the rules)
There's also a feat for Bards that allows them to conceal spellcasting within a performance.
Ah, wraithstrike got to it first! I was looking for that link.
The point that Jason Bulmahn was making is that magic may have other qualities that are not described. My favorite example being a crackle of arcane energy.
If you think of magic this way, it clarifies so many of these issues. It now makes sense why Still, Silent, and Eschew Materials do not affect AoO or Counter-Spells.
I'm a fan of there being a perfectly reasonable way of looking at magic that completely explains all weirdness that the rules can present. I like to promote the idea that magic itself has more aspects to it than the simple description.
A Wizard's eyes turning stark white, a crackle of energy in the air, and a sudden change in atmospheric pressure are all flavorful and completely reasonable ways to picture why these feats do not alter the primary effects in combat.
It is not technically RAW, but it is not technically NOT RAW, and since a developer weighed in, it may be possibly RAI, which is why I do so love to promote it.