Here is an interesting question, would silence negate the abilities of a Cavalier’s and Samurai’s challenge, an Inquisitor’s judgment, or a Paladin’s smite evil? In their written descriptions, these do seem as if a verbal declaration is made. Thoughts?
Cavalier and Samurai. Challenge (Ex): Once per day, a cavalier can challenge a foe to combat.
Inquisitor. Judgment (Su): Starting at 1st level, an inquisitor can pronounce judgment upon her foes as a swift action.
Paladin. Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil.
|
The written descriptions make it seem like the character verbally declares the ability's use, but once the effect has begun, it doesn't require the user to keep talking. Casting Silence on a Inquisitor who already has a judgement up wouldn't turn off his judgement, because he's already pronounced it.
I tend to favor the consensus that silence does not negate, but clever cleric spots intrusive inquisitor before they engage in combat. Clever cleric casts a few buff spells and finally silence on self and rushes to engage intrusive inquisitor, would intrusive inquisitor be able to pronounce judgment on clever cleric? And don't get me started on pious paladin and sullen samurai.
|
Comrade-enforced silence (the "shut the hell up, Hernando, we're supposed to be undercover!" kind) was the primary reason I was considering purchasing a Helm of Telepathy. Would those of you who rule Challenge doesn't work without verbal components let it work in that situation? Merely curious, as this is a PFS character, and would like to see what the masses think.
You can Challenge, Judge and Smite non-verbally. It happens in movies all the times. I am sure a menacing point followed by either a thumb across the throat or a cocky upturned hand with a come hither gesture.
While I don't know about any of the other situations (or even Cavaliers as a whole) but the Silence spell would effectively shut down an Order of the Blue Rose Cavalier, seeing as how they have to call for the surrender of their Challenge target.
I consider most of the requirements on that sort of stuff to be pretty loose.
As long as you're not sneaking behind your enemies and stabbing them in the back non-verbal actions are more than enough to get your message across.
Doing something as simple a pointing your sword at them, glaring at them and giving them a thumbs down or motioning them drop their weapons should work.
Nope, not by RAW. None of them require anything verbal or an actual announcement.
Example: Pronouncing judgement just means I have decided that the enemy really needs to die. I don't have to tell him I am going to try a lot harder by calling upon my deity to kill him.
There is no verbal component to any of those other then RP fluff. Silence shouldn't effect it.
Using Fluff to gain in-game benefits or provide negatives is meta gaming imo.
As wraithstrike said, there is nothing in those abilities that calls out needing verbal components. Bard abilities, for example, state that the target must hear them to be affected. Smite/challenge/judgment do nothing of the sort.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Using Fluff to gain in-game benefits or provide negatives is meta gaming imo.
How the heck did you come to that conclusion? If anything its the opposite!
Cleric: Every time the Black Knight has attacked me he's yelled "gods of destruction, through my body smite this selfrighteous goodytwoshoes into smithereens", and then his eyes have started glowing red. Maybe if i silenced him he couldnt call for those abyssal gods?Fighter: nah, wont work. Smite good doesnt say you have to call the gods _verbally_.
Who of these is metagaming again?
No.
Holding up a middle finger and grabbing various parts of your anatomy in a derisive fashion transcend both culture and species.
Thank you. I too favored the belief that these were actions that were done without a verbal declaration, but the subject did come up and we had a similar discussion and outcome. Thank you for the brilliant examples!