Concealing a Spell

[Cranefist]

Hello,

I'm trying to write up a 5th level sorcerer for a 25 point buy game.

I'm making him a fay blooded sorcerer with a 20 Charisma. The main issue I'm having is I can't tell what an enemy has to do to detect that you are casting a spell.

Can I use Bluff to conceal that I'm casting a spell?

What about Slight of Hand?

What about either combined with Silent Spell or Still Spell?

[ProfPotts]

As a baseline you can't really conceal spellcasting, but check out the Secret Signs Feat on page 288 of the Inner Sea World Guide for some help in hiding the casting of somatic component only spells.

[Cranefist]

ProfPotts wrote:

As a baseline you can't really conceal spellcasting, but check out the Secret Signs Feat on page 288 of the Inner Sea World Guide for some help in hiding the casting of somatic component only spells.

Well, if that's the case I probably won't bother with Silent Spell. Thank you.

[ProfPotts]

Well Silent Spell would help make other spells somatic component only spells, and thus be eligible to be concealed by the Secret Signs Feat, so it could work.

Of course, the whole IDing spellcasting thing is from a RAW point of view; individual GMs may (quite sensibly) rule that component-less spellcasting isn't noticable (unless you happen to be running Detect Magic or something, I guess).

[Cranefist]

Eh, maybe. Extend Spell is just as useful for an enchanter anyway. Don't want the victims catching on or waking up too quickly.

[keaton13]

if 3.5 sources are aloud you could take the skill trick "conceal spellcasting" but that's all I can think of and that's up to the DM