|
Silence...the poor man's antimagic field.
I really, really hate this spell. The usual tactic of my players is to cast Greater Invisibility, Silence on some small object (a tiny stone), sneak up to the caster baddie, drop the stone at his feet, melee charges in.
If Silence could be only cast on area (no saves involved, I'm fine with that) or on a creature (with Save) it would be fine, but the "unattended object" option is a killer, turning many combats in my games into "Creative Silence Usage Contest". And that's not what combat prep should be about. I tried to explain my players that Silence is not a sure-fire tactic but got a reply that it's so effective when it works that it's worth the risk.
The funny metagame effect of Silence in my games is either making seemingly hard encounters really easy (latest victim - Barl), or making seemingly easy encoungers damn hard (a stupid low level caster with See Invisibility takes the "sneak silencer" out with one spell and the party goes south).
Director of Games
|
The bigger concern was this spell being used as a counterspell (ie readying an action to cast it as an opponent casts a spell). As it stands now, I think there are a host of ways around it.
It should be noted that the bad guy should know something is up the moment everything goes silent. After all, if he is a spellcaster, he would know of this trick, and would probably get out of the area ASAP.
But I am open to thoughts..
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Also noteworthy is how Silence would, as a second-level spell, act as an infinite Move Silently score. Nowadays, one needs both Silence and Invisibility to accomplish an infinite Stealth score.
The real problem with Silence, in regards to caster-killing, is that it's labelled an Illusion, but yet it acts as a Transmutation. If Silence were Will Disbelief, like just about every other Glamer, it would mostly function like a second-level spell: Will save, or be unable to cast in that area. If a caster were hit with Silence as a readied action (which would require Quicken Spell or Rapid Spell in Pathfinder Beta, since it was changed from a Standard Action casting time to a One Round casting time), he would roll a Will save, then he would probably be subject to a Spellcraft roll for being distracted by a nondamaging spell, and that would be all.
However, then you'd have the issue of casters Silencing themselves just for the infinite half-of-Stealth score.
Not perfect, but better than 3.5's Silence. Though I avoided the ready-action Silence tactic myself, another player in my sessions loved it, and so many high-level battles would devolve into Silence Wars, to the point where a chain of readied actions would go off, in order to Silence the enemy caster's Silence readied against a friendly spell.
As I didn't like that aspect, my method of dealing with Silence, by the way, was to cast Contingency on my familiar, and load a (Lesser) Globe of Invulnerability into it, worded to trigger when my arcanist was about to be affected by a suppressable effect (i.e. Silence, but also Enervation, Ray of Enfeeblement, Magic Missile, etc), so it can be dealt with.
But anyways, adding Will Disbelief to the Save line would fix the readied-action Silence issue, by making it act like an Illusion, not a Transmutation.
-Matt
|
|
The latest move of my party was to Silence a sneak using Invisibility Sphere, followed by a barrage of xbow bolts at poor Barl Breakbones - one of the bolts was Silenced (and the shooter True Striked to make sure no misses will be involved).
Barl got hit thrice, and I was faced with a "which thing is making me silent ?" problem. If he could cast detect magic ... but no, V component.
Solutions:
a) Make it an Illusion and allow Will saves regardless of casting method.
and/or
b) The "unattended object" variant should go, simply. If it's cast on area the victim can easily move away, and if it's cast on creature it gets a Will save (which most casters pass easily).
Never really had a huge problem with this spell. I've used it against the PCs just as much, if not more than they have used it against the bad guys.
It's also good to remember that once the PC melee folks run into combat in the silent area they cannot hear their allies. So just how badly hurt is the fighter? If the cleric can't talk to him or hear him it might take a skill check or something like that to figure it out. And then there's the problem of casting the curing spell anyway, since the fighter's in a silence area.
I've always thought that a caster, both PC & NPC can figure out pretty quickly that they are in a silence. Then they simply move and snap their fingers until they can hear again. Granted, in a confined space that's not always possible...but then that's just good tactics and shouldn't be discouraged.
...
b) The "unattended object" variant should go, simply. If it's cast on area the victim can easily move away, and if it's cast on creature it gets a Will save (which most casters pass easily).
But the spell can still be cast directly at one of the parties' melee guys; when they have reached the enemy caster, he will have a hard time to get rid of them again.
Am I missing something with the silenced arrow/bolt trick? I was under the impression that ammo is destroyed when it hits a target. So, unless the silenced arrow misses, the effect goes away when the arrow hits. Now, silence on a thrown weapon which isn't destroyed when it hits should be able to stick around, but it would be pretty obvious which dagger made things go quiet, and the range on thrown weapons doesn't really allow for the kind of trickiness permitted when the ammo being destroyed does not lift the silence affected bullet, arrow, or bolt.
|
|
Quoting SRD: ammunition that hits its target is destroyed or rendered useless.
If I told my players that the crossbow bolts evaporate the moment they hit.. well, their suspension of disbelief has it's limits. I have already had a jolly time in the "Shocking Grasp underwater" issue, and I try not to push the envelope of gamism too far :)
Silence...the poor man's anti-magic field.
turning many combats in my games into "Creative Silence Usage Contest"
I've currently got mt pc's using the creative tactic of using silence on/with the sorcerer's familiar giving the effect mobility and intelligence.
I agree it can be difficult to deal with but nothing I'd call overpowered. And any tactic used too often against an organized foe quickly becomes something that can be circumvented. (like knowing to target the familiar)
I agree that the mechanic for illusion/glamors should be applied or the spell re-categorized to transmutation perhaps different versions of the same spell effect?
It should be noted that the bad guy should know something is up the moment everything goes silent. After all, if he is a spellcaster, he would know of this trick, and would probably get out of the area ASAP.
As a cleric, I have found that casting Silence on my barbarian friend can do wonders. The caster just can't get out of the area so easily, as the area follows him around.
Someday of course, it will be my turn I guess...
I like the save idea, it fits with the other spells, or the area, but not really casting on a person as it doesn't solve the problem.
DW
|
I like the save idea, it fits with the other spells, or the area, but not really casting on a person as it doesn't solve the problem.
DW
I always read the spell description in the 3.x version of D&D very literally. There's a sentence that says:
The spell can be centered on a creature, and the effect then radiates from the creature and moves as it moves. An unwilling creature can attempt a Will save to negate the spell and can use spell resistance, if any.
Note how these two sentences are unrelated by the use of a pronoun in the second one? To me, that means that (a) centering the effect on a creature causes the effect to radiate from the creature and move as it moves, and (b) unwilling creatures gain a Will save to negate the spell (and use SR, blah blah).
So if you cast the spell on a creature, the silence moves with the creature.
If you cast a spell where a creature occupies the AOE, such creature gains a Will save to negate the effect for that creature. The caster must check SR for such creatures as well. This works exactly like an illusion would generally work, since you gain a Will save if you interact with it -- and suddenly going deaf would be considered interaction.
If you rule this way, the silence spell falls more inline with the power level of other 2nd level spells. The one interesting effect here is that some targets may choose to fail their saves on purpose so that they cannot be affected by sonic attacks.
Anyway, that's the way I rule it...
The latest move of my party was to Silence a sneak using Invisibility Sphere, followed by a barrage of xbow bolts at poor Barl Breakbones - one of the bolts was Silenced (and the shooter True Striked to make sure no misses will be involved).
Barl got hit thrice, and I was faced with a "which thing is making me silent ?" problem. If he could cast detect magic ... but no, V component.
Solutions:
a) Make it an Illusion and allow Will saves regardless of casting method.
and/or
b) The "unattended object" variant should go, simply. If it's cast on area the victim can easily move away, and if it's cast on creature it gets a Will save (which most casters pass easily).
I guess the true striker had the silent spell feat ? In which case sure, I'm okay with all this. We also have been using this technique, or personnal favorite is casting silence on a something small and have it wielded by an unseen servant.
Well not too much counters to silence techniques. Put some silent alarms to warn from intruders, have a silent spell ready to protect yourself, and do not hesitate to abuse of the same techniques on your party...
Note how these two sentences are unrelated by the use of a pronoun in the second one? To me, that means that (a) centering the effect on a creature causes the effect to radiate from the creature and move as it moves, and (b) unwilling creatures gain a Will save to negate the spell (and use SR, blah blah).
So if you cast the spell on a creature, the silence moves with the creature.
If you cast a spell where a creature occupies the AOE, such creature gains a Will save to negate the effect for that creature. The caster must check SR for such creatures as well. This works exactly like an illusion would generally work, since you gain a Will save if you interact with it -- and suddenly going deaf would be considered interaction.
I'm not sure I read it the same way. I would tend to see the second phrase as relating to the creature targeted by the spell. But if it is the correct or desired interpretation, the wording would need something along the lines of: Any creature in the AOE or entering the AOE can attempt...
Along the same lines of enquiry, would the listeners outside the Silence get also a save? I would say no if there is no interaction. But if they see something that should make a sound and doesn't? Can they get a save and hear? For example, a raging and charging barbarian stomping towards someone and, surprisingly, stomping without a sound (because the cleric cast a Silence on his dagger). Would they get a save to hear the barbarian and not be subjected to the effect once he closes in?
It's a pretty good spell anyway, and makes for great creative and strategic fights.
DW
The bigger concern was this spell being used as a counterspell (ie readying an action to cast it as an opponent casts a spell). As it stands now, I think there are a host of ways around it.
It should be noted that the bad guy should know something is up the moment everything goes silent. After all, if he is a spellcaster, he would know of this trick, and would probably get out of the area ASAP.
But I am open to thoughts..
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
How about allowing Concentration checks, or Spellcraft checks or Caster level checks or whatever else it is that ultimately ends up replacing Concentration, to allow casters to cast spells without verbal components? The DC could be 15 + 2 x Spell Level or something along those lines.
Yes, this change would make the Silent Spell metamagic feat relatively less useful. Perhaps Silent Spell would not be a metamagic feat at all (Really, how often does it get used? Who knows ahead of time that he/she will be captured and thus prepares spells with the feat?...), but would provide a +10 (or some appropriate) bonus to Concentration/Spellcraft/Caster Level checks to cast silently.
Althought that is not the topic of this thread, I might even consider the same approach for Still Spell and casting spells without Somatic Components.
Silence should probably be a Transmutation spell instead of an Illusion spell. After all, if it's an illusion spell, you should be able to "disbelieve" the Silence once you interact with it, correct? But if you do make it a Transmutation effect, there should probably be some kind of spell that can counter silence effects.
I agree with Suezo, transmutation makes much more sense to me.
Silence should be prevented to be used a poorman's AMF.
A second level spell that allows the party to talk without being listened or to move with reduced noise is ok, every other use (in particular offensive use) would be unbalanced.
I must say that I appreciate how the ritual Silence is working in 4th edition.
|
|
Silence should be prevented to be used a poorman's AMF.
I am considering changing the Silence spell into an Evocation (Sonic), similar to Light and Darkness in that it affects the enviroment in some fashion.
Silence
Evocation (Sonic)
Level: Brd 2, Clr 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Area: 20-ft.-radius emanation centered on a creature, object, or point in space
Duration: 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: Fort negates; see text or none (object)
Spell Resistance: No
Upon the casting of this spell, complete silence prevails in the affected area. All sound is stopped and creatures in the area are effectively deafened: Conversation is impossible, spells with verbal components are cast with a 20% chance of failure, and no noise whatsoever issues from, enters, or passes through the area. The spell can be cast on a point in space, but the effect is stationary unless cast on a mobile object. The spell can be centered on a creature, and the effect then radiates from the creature and moves as it moves. An unwilling targeted creature can attempt a Fort save to negate the spell and can use spell resistance, if any. Items in a creature’s possession or magic items that emit sound receive the benefits of saves and spell resistance, but unattended objects and points in space do not. This spell provides a defense against sonic or language-based attacks. It is countered or negated by Sound Burst and counters or negates the same.
---
"Its not what you are doing, its how you look doing it!" The Unknown bard
---
Steven... I do believe that you have cracked the case!
Well done!
An unwilling targeted creature can attempt a Fort save to negate the spell
At first this seemed odd to me, until I considered that casters are supposed to fear this effect, and using their weak save helps with that (except in the case of clerics and druids).
I'm a little worried that simply casting silence near the caster allows no save. What if instead of nullifying all sound within the radius, all creatures in the radius must make a Fort save or lose the ability to produce sound?
|
An unwilling targeted creature can attempt a Fort save to negate the spellAt first this seemed odd to me, until I considered that casters are supposed to fear this effect, and using their weak save helps with that (except in the case of clerics and druids).
I'm a little worried that simply casting silence near the caster allows no save. What if instead of nullifying all sound within the radius, all creatures in the radius must make a Fort save or lose the ability to produce sound?
It does mean no save, but it also means that the target (who will realise what has happened quickly) can move out of the area while snapping their fingers (as mentioned above).
I think that a blanket 'no sound in the area' is more appropriate to an evocation than per-creature saves, and is also less dice rolling.
|
|
Silence should be prevented to be used a poorman's AMF.I am considering changing the Silence spell into an Evocation (Sonic), similar to Light and Darkness in that it affects the enviroment in some fashion.
Silence
Evocation (Sonic)
Level: Brd 2, Clr 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Area: 20-ft.-radius emanation centered on a creature, object, or point in space
Duration: 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: Fort negates; see text or none (object)
Spell Resistance: NoUpon the casting of this spell, complete silence prevails in the affected area. All sound is stopped and creatures in the area are effectively deafened: Conversation is impossible, spells with verbal components are cast with a 20% chance of failure, and no noise whatsoever issues from, enters, or passes through the area. The spell can be cast on a point in space, but the effect is stationary unless cast on a mobile object. The spell can be centered on a creature, and the effect then radiates from the creature and moves as it moves. An unwilling targeted creature can attempt a Fort save to negate the spell and can use spell resistance, if any. Items in a creature’s possession or magic items that emit sound receive the benefits of saves and spell resistance, but unattended objects and points in space do not. This spell provides a defense against sonic or language-based attacks. It is countered or negated by Sound Burst and counters or negates the same.
---
A couple of slight changes for consistency in wording and to remove the alternate interpretation of 'targeted creature' above:
The spell can be cast on a point in space or on an unattended object, but the effect is stationary unless cast on a mobile object.
An unwilling creature targeted in this way can attempt a Fort save to negate the spell and can use spell resistance, if any.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
What if you change the spell so that it either can be cast on a point in space that does not move, or on a creature, but if on a creature it only affects that creature? That way, if you want to stop a caster with silence, you either cast it on them, but give them a save, or cast it on the area they're in, but they can leave, and you can't have your ally with the spell on them keep playing tag with the caster to keep them silenced?
I've seen silence turn combats around, but that's hardly unique. Would you also nuke web for its ability to shut down melee-types? How about entangle?
My point is that a wide variety of spells can have devistating effects. Additionally, there are numerous possibilities open for countering excessive reliance on silence (or any other particular spell). (Some ideas have been discussed elsewhere in the thread.)
What if you change the spell so that it either can be cast on a point in space that does not move, or on a creature, but if on a creature it only affects that creature? That way, if you want to stop a caster with silence, you either cast it on them, but give them a save, or cast it on the area they're in, but they can leave, and you can't have your ally with the spell on them keep playing tag with the caster to keep them silenced?
I like that. I think Silence is more interesting tactically if it can be used to neutralize a caster.
Two thumbs up for Silence as Evocation.
It's been mentioned that Schools might be adjusted, and this seems perfect.
|
|
Modified with the recommendations of brock and JoelF847
Silence
Evocation (Sonic)
Level: Brd 2, Clr 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Area: 20-ft.-radius emanation centered on a creature, object, or point in space
Duration: 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: Fort negates; see text or none (object)
Spell Resistance: Yes
Upon the casting of this spell, complete silence prevails in the affected area. All sound is stopped and creatures in the area are effectively deafened: Conversation is impossible, spells with verbal components are cast with a 20% chance of failure, and no noise whatsoever issues from, enters, or passes through the area. The spell can be cast on a point in space or on an unattended object, but the effect is stationary unless cast on a mobile object. The spell can be centered on a creature, but only that creature is deafened for the duration of the spell. An unwilling creature targeted in this way can attempt a Fort save to negate the spell and can use spell resistance, if any. Items in a creature’s possession or magic items that emit sound receive the benefits of saves and spell resistance, but unattended objects and points in space do not. This spell provides a defense against sonic or language-based attacks. It is countered or negated by Sound Burst and counters or negates the same.
spells with verbal components are cast with a 20% chance of failure
I don't like this part. If all sound is stopped, then it should simply prevent spells with a verbal component. That might create more incentive for casters to take the Silent Spell feat. If missing the save only applies a 20% failure chance, it's probably a waste of an action to use this spell against a caster.
I still think this spell is easier to adjudicate as a status effect, but I realize that would be a departure from the original intent in 1e. The radius of non-sound is cool, but it doesn't allow a save, so casters have to find a way out of the radius. Even a high level caster can be neutralized by many low level casters if they leave him nowhere to go.
If silence is used as a counterspell, I would allow the caster a save to delay the onset of silence in his immediate vicinity until just after completing his spell, as long as the casting time is a standard action. Or, if the caster still has an unused move action (or if a 5-foot step would get him out of the silence effect) I would just let him move to complete the spell automatically. As long as the caster is in the radius of a silence spell, he should not be allowed to begin casting any spell with a verbal component.
I really like this particular vulnerability of casters, and I think it should remain an effective, low-level option for preventing their devastating spell powers.
spells with verbal components are cast with a 20% chance of failureI don't like this part. If all sound is stopped, then it should simply prevent spells with a verbal component. That might create more incentive for casters to take the Silent Spell feat. If missing the save only applies a 20% failure chance, it's probably a waste of an action to use this spell against a caster.
I agree with you on this. I think it might be better to modify Sound Burst so that it can be used inside areas of Silence to destroy them. a 20% spell failure chance doesn't seem like it is significant enough, but my mind hasn't been set in stone just yet on this matter.
Sound burst as an active counter does seem like a good idea to me. I also agree with the idea that Silence should stop all spells with vocal components. If they still want to cast a spell with a vocal component that's what silent spell metamagic is for.
And now in no particular order:
I would actually like to see more "X counters Y" in spells as was suggested that sound burst counter silence. It works well for the light/dark spells, and I think it would solve a lot of problems with counter-spelling in general.
Silence is a 20 foot radius, so unless you are outside with more than 40 feet between people, someone is going to notice when everything goes completely quiet thus negating the "infinite" Stealth score. They should get a Perception check to see if they notice that all sound completely stopped with the DC dependent on the situation.
If the party uses this trick all the time, then the bad guys should take the steps to counter this tactic by working out hand gestures to communicate, learn spells with the Silent Spell metamagic feat and use magic items that don't require sound to work. They are going to well one too many times for this to continue working.
I concur on all points!
|
|
What if you change the spell so that it either can be cast on a point in space that does not move, or on a creature, but if on a creature it only affects that creature? That way, if you want to stop a caster with silence, you either cast it on them, but give them a save, or cast it on the area they're in, but they can leave, and you can't have your ally with the spell on them keep playing tag with the caster to keep them silenced?
I think this is the fairest and simplest adjudication yet.
And it should be a Transmutation (not much different in how it affects targets than a Slow or Haste spell really - obviously the effects are different - but the way it affects things sounds like Transmutation).
I raise my glass to you, Joel.
Robert
I recently had an encounter in a play-by-post game I am DMing in which a player cast silence on an item, then proceeded to follow a spellcaster around with readied actions. Since the player was invisible and had a huge hide bonus, could not really be detected by the spellcaster. This 2nd level spell basically took out an 11th level lich. The party was able to pummel it safely.