I did not hear that.

[wraithstrike]

According to the new FAQ clarification

Quote:

Witch, Cackle Hex: Does my character literally have to cackle madly when I use this hex, or is that just flavor text?

Your character actually has to cackle—probably in a strong voice, akin to the volume and clarity necessary for verbal spell components.

That seems to signify that a silence spell can block cackle, but previously I thought it did not because it is not a sonic affect so I thought the cackling was just flavor text.

My question is this, If an effect uses sound as the medium of delivery should we assume it has to be heard to be effective, even if it is NOT listed as a sonic effect?

PS: If order to avoid any confusion the specific question I want to be answered is bolded.

FAQ please.

[Xaratherus]

FAQ'ed.

I'm fairly certain that the answer will be that you don't have to actually be heard - you simply have to produce the sound at a volume that could be heard.

Otherwise, it's a step away from saying that spells with somatic components don't work on the deaf, because the deaf can't hear them.

[Ximen Bao]

I don't believe this needs a faq.

Saying you have to have a verbal component to an action is not saying your target has to hear you.

[The black raven]

Agreed with Ximen Bao.

That you need to cackle with "the volume and clarity necessary for verbal spell components" does not suddenly add a verbal spell component to Cackle that would enable Silence to negate it.

[Pizza Lord]

A 'verbal' component, like having to cackle, whisper, speak a command word can be blocked by silence if the caster cannot perform the action. Silence does not prevent the effect of an ability or spell with a 'verbal' component that is activated outside the silence area unless the effect is [sonic] or [Language-dependent]. So, for example, silence on a caster will prevent him from using a wand of lightning since he can't speak the command word. Silence on the target but not on the caster won't stop the lightning bolt from hitting him.

A [Sonic] effect can be blocked by silence which will protect the area and targets included in the silence. This is separate from a a spell having a verbal component. For example, a caster could cast a silent Sound Burst while within a silence effect, but the spell wouldn't do any damage to anyone in the silence.

A [Language-dependent] spell does not have to be a [Sonic] spell but the target must be able to hear and understand what you say to be affected. Usually this is a command-type spell. If the target doesn't know you're ordering it to kneel, it doesn't have to. So silence is effective against such spells.

Most [Sonic] spells are not affected by a target's ability to hear them. Some are helpful enough to tell you, such as blasphemy and power word x. Otherwise, the spell generally creates disruptive harmonics that are damaging whether they hit a deaf person or a statue with no ears.

If a witch can't cackle because she can't breathe, is gagged, or in a silence spell, then she can't use the ability. If she can cackle, it doesn't matter if the targets can hear or are in silence since it actually affects the hexes on them and hexes can't hear anyway. The difference between this and casting a spell with a Verbal component is because a deafened witch can still do it without having a 20% failure chance, which a spell with a Verbal component would have.

So while most Supernatural abilities don't have components as a spell would, even when they emulate the spell nearly exactly, they can have actions and requirements for use.

Quote:

Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical attacks, defenses, and qualities. These abilities can be always active or they can require a specific action to utilize. The supernatural ability's description includes information on how it is used and its effects.

In this case, Cackle is used by actually cackling.

[Ximen Bao]

The black raven wrote:

Agreed with Ximen Bao.

That you need to cackle with "the volume and clarity necessary for verbal spell components" does not suddenly add a verbal spell component to Cackle that would enable Silence to negate it.

That's actually in disagreement with what I said. :)

I was saying it DOES add a verbal component (you must speak loudly in the same tone as if spellcasting with V component), but nothing in that states or implies you must be heard.

So silence on the witch would prevent a cackle but silence on the target would not.

[wraithstrike]

Ximen Bao wrote:

I don't believe this needs a faq.

Saying you have to have a verbal component to an action is not saying your target has to hear you.

Actually it does need an FAQ because this is not just about cackle. It also determines which abilities needs to be actually heard vs which ones mention sound as flavor only. It would also determine which ones are stopped by a silence spell.

[Pizza Lord]

Possibly, similar to how one hex says you spend a full-round action to form a crude wax figurine of your target. Does that mean you need to have wax (or something like a spell component pouch)and free hands to mold it during the action, or does that mean using the hex merely takes a full-round action and at the conclusion the hex also acts as a minor creation that creates a wax figurine resembling the target from thin air for you to use.

Such things might indeed need a bit more clarification.

[Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus]

Xaratherus wrote:

FAQ'ed.

I'm fairly certain that the answer will be that you don't have to actually be heard - you simply have to produce the sound at a volume that could be heard.

Otherwise, it's a step away from saying that spells with somatic components don't work on the deaf, because the deaf can't hear them.

You mean verbal, right? But I agree.

[Xaratherus]

Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:

Xaratherus wrote:

FAQ'ed.

I'm fairly certain that the answer will be that you don't have to actually be heard - you simply have to produce the sound at a volume that could be heard.

Otherwise, it's a step away from saying that spells with somatic components don't work on the deaf, because the deaf can't hear them.

You mean verbal, right? But I agree.

...

Whoops. Yes. 8P

[Ximen Bao]

wraithstrike wrote:

Ximen Bao wrote:

I don't believe this needs a faq.

Saying you have to have a verbal component to an action is not saying your target has to hear you.

Actually it does need an FAQ because this is not just about cackle. It also determines which abilities needs to be actually heard vs which ones mention sound as flavor only. It would also determine which ones are stopped by a silence spell.

But there is no suggestion of abilities that need to be heard without explicit commentary to that effect.

The FAQ you quoted in the OP specifies that sound needs to be made, not heard.

If you want a general question not about cackle, the question should be:

If an effect uses sound as the medium of delivery should we assume the sound must actually be made, even if it is NOT listed as a sonic effect?

[Xaratherus]

@Ximen Bao: That was my feeling on the meaning\purpose of the original FAQ as well, but I always welcome clarification.

[wraithstrike]

Ximen Bao wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Ximen Bao wrote:

I don't believe this needs a faq.

Saying you have to have a verbal component to an action is not saying your target has to hear you.

Actually it does need an FAQ because this is not just about cackle. It also determines which abilities needs to be actually heard vs which ones mention sound as flavor only. It would also determine which ones are stopped by a silence spell.

But there is no suggestion of abilities that need to be heard without explicit commentary to that effect.

The FAQ you quoted in the OP specifies that sound needs to be made, not heard.

If you want a general question not about cackle, the question should be:

If an effect uses sound as the medium of delivery should we assume the sound must actually be made, even if it is NOT listed as a sonic effect?

I NEVER said I was asking about cackle. I used cackle as an example and I even bolded the specific question I was asking.

PS: Read your suggested question, and what I bolded in the opening statement, and tell me the difference. I also bolded your suggestion. ;)

They are basically the same, and neither one references cackle in case you missed it.

[wraithstrike]

Ximen Bao wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Ximen Bao wrote:

I don't believe this needs a faq.

Saying you have to have a verbal component to an action is not saying your target has to hear you.

Actually it does need an FAQ because this is not just about cackle. It also determines which abilities needs to be actually heard vs which ones mention sound as flavor only. It would also determine which ones are stopped by a silence spell.

But there is no suggestion of abilities that need to be heard without explicit commentary to that effect.

I am sure the devs know such abilities exist. I don't need to make a list for them. The intent is also not hard to understand. If an ability has to be heard then being deaf would also work, but if the sound only needs to reach the enemy then being deaf would not.

[Ximen Bao]

wraithstrike wrote:

Ximen Bao wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Ximen Bao wrote:

I don't believe this needs a faq.

Saying you have to have a verbal component to an action is not saying your target has to hear you.

Actually it does need an FAQ because this is not just about cackle. It also determines which abilities needs to be actually heard vs which ones mention sound as flavor only. It would also determine which ones are stopped by a silence spell.

But there is no suggestion of abilities that need to be heard without explicit commentary to that effect.

The FAQ you quoted in the OP specifies that sound needs to be made, not heard.

If you want a general question not about cackle, the question should be:

If an effect uses sound as the medium of delivery should we assume the sound must actually be made, even if it is NOT listed as a sonic effect?

I NEVER said I was asking about cackle. I used cackle as an example and I even bolded the specific question I was asking.

PS: Read your suggested question, and what I bolded in the opening statement, and tell me the difference. I also bolded your suggestion. ;)

They are basically the same, and neither one references cackle in case you missed it.

They are not at all the same. They are completely different questions. You asked about hearing sounds, which appears no where in the FAQ you quoted. I talked about making sounds, which is the relevant issue.

[Pathfinder Design Team]

FAQ updated: http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9qox

(new text in "out of character commentary" style)

Edit 7/19/13:
If the witch is in a silence effect, she can't use the cackle hex.
If the target is in a silence effect, it is unaffected by the cackle.
This may require some clarifying text in the next printing of the Advanced Player's Guide.

[Ansel Krulwich]

I wouldn't have expected the second part of that updated ruling. Wow.

[Sober Caydenite]

Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

FAQ updated: http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9qox

(new text in "out of character commentary" style)

Edit 7/19/13:
If the witch is in a silence effect, she can't use the cackle hex.
If the target is in a silence effect, it is unaffected by the cackle.
This may require some clarifying text in the next printing of the Advanced Player's Guide.

What if the target is deaf?

[Rynjin]

Thar be quite a few disappointing FAQs today.

[Pizza Lord]

I am a bit surprised at the second portion myself but it does sound like they plan to clarify it.

[ciretose]

Rynjin wrote:

Thar be quite a few disappointing FAQs today.

I've only seen one (halfling sling). The rest I've like a great deal.