how to notice a silent / stilled spell?


Rules Questions


I imagine its perception, to notice the left eye twitching on the spellcaster as he stares at you, but whats the DC? What if its just stilled, and he whispers the words?
What if its silent? Are gestures obvious, or could twiddling your thumbs be the gesture for a time-altering spell?

I imagine detect magic would help, since you'd see the energies collecting, their aura spiking in power, etc.

Its a homebrew campaign, but I'm curious about RAW, RAI, and house rule variants.

What would the check be to recognize the spell being cast before its finished?

What about to identify a completed spell with subtle or hidden effects? (Like a visible wizard casting invisibility on a stealthed rogue hidden from the pcs...)


Per the RAW, Silent and Still spell actually do not affect the visibility of a spell, nor do they make it more difficult for a spell to be noticed, nor do they allow a spellcaster to hide his casting.

In fact, I'm not sure there ARE any such rules, at all, in either direction. I just did a quick glance through on all the sections I could think of that would have that information, and didn't see it. I thought I recalled a rule regarding perception... but, well, I didn't see anything. There were old 3.5 rules that allowed one to disguise their spellcasting, but those didn't make it over, as far as I'm aware.

So RAW, nothing happens. As for detect magic, RAW, no change. As for the check, RAW, no check. As for the final question, that would be standard spellcraft checks while using detect magic.

Judging by your post, you seem to only want the RAW, so there it is. If you want to open up this thread to homebrew and houserules versions of these feats and peoples' opinions on how they should disguise spells, that's a whole different conversation, and I'm sure lots of people would love to weigh in.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

If the spell still uses material components, I'm sure seeing him pulling those components out of his spell component pouch would be a lovely tip. If it's only one of the two, I'd have the caster roll a bluff check as though they were attempting to pass a hidden message. If you wanted to do opposing skill checks, I'd have the person rolling perception use either perception or spellcraft, whichever is higher. As for official rulings, my word is naught but useless.


By RAW, there is no difference between identifying a normal spell and one being cast with Silent and/or Still spell. You just have to see the spell being cast to be able to identify it. In 3.5 D&D, it specifically said you needed to be able to see the spells somatic component, or hear the spells verbal component, to identify the spell. This was dropped in Pathfinder. The Spellcraft DC to identify any spell being cast is 15 + the spells level.

The Knowledge(Arcana) DC to identify an existing spells effects is 20 + the spells save DC. (In 3.5, you had to see the spells effects in order to identify it. Like with identifying a spell being cast, this was removed in Pathfinder, as it isn't mentioned in the Knowledge(Arcana) skill.


My understanding is that the words need to pronounced in a loud, clear voice (PRD: "To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice.") and that the gestures need to be similarly dramatic. (PRD: "A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand.") So you can't scale down the components to make them subtle, as they're pretty obvious if someone's watching for them.

There are rules for using Stealth to cast spells subtly, but this is more sleight of hand to disguise what you're doing or to turn attention away from the interesting bit (if I can get you watching my right hand, I can make any gesture I like with my left, or speaking the words just when the marching band passes by so you don't hear it). I think it was a DC 20+the spell level according to the rules in Skull and Shackles for a Stealth check.


If someone want's to spend the effective metamagic levels for a spell to be silent and still, I say rock on. there's a reason to do it, and it should have its rewards. Just looking to jack someone with an obscure rule justification because he did the same with a surprise magic missle doesn't really make for good gaming.

Either metamagic would still grant you a perception within reason. If a wizard is whispering the spell in the middle of an angry mob, good luck with that. And again, in both cases, if you do spot the casting, you need to make a spellcraft check to identify the spell, be it verbal or somatic. Were I the GM, I'd even apply penalties to the check being that you're missing almost half the corresponding components to identify with.

now, for your example of the thief receiving invisibility from a visible wizard? I would consider that being akin to saying "THERE HE IS!" until the spell takes effect. you are literally directing your enemy's attention to your target, until the magic takes effect. Should it be a spell like bless, or any that just has a 'within range' modifier, then I'd still keep the thief's stealth check against the PC's perception.


So perhaps a bonus to spot the thief (+5, maybe) after you see the wizard look in his direction to cast the spell, otherwise you might think he's trying to cast invisibility on the tree the rogue is hiding behind..

I am looking for rai and house rules that handle this, since i now see why i couldn't find a raw explanation. So RAW, silent and stilled spells are only for being bound and gagged, evidently. That's pretty situational for a pair of feats.


Redchigh wrote:

So perhaps a bonus to spot the thief (+5, maybe) after you see the wizard look in his direction to cast the spell, otherwise you might think he's trying to cast invisibility on the tree the rogue is hiding behind..

I am looking for rai and house rules that handle this, since i now see why i couldn't find a raw explanation. So RAW, silent and stilled spells are only for being bound and gagged, evidently. That's pretty situational for a pair of feats.

Or grappled, or in a silence field, et cetera.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
Redchigh wrote:
So RAW, silent and stilled spells are only for being bound and gagged, evidently. That's pretty situational for a pair of feats.

Or under the effect of a silence spell. Or paralyzed by a ghoul. Still not exactly common, but more useful than simply when bound and gagged.


Redchigh wrote:
So RAW, silent and stilled spells are only for being bound and gagged, evidently. That's pretty situational for a pair of feats.

Terrible feats and excellent rods every spellcaster should have.

That said, what you want to do with them (hiding that you're casting a spell) still makes them bad feats. People not knowing what you're casting is in no way worth a feat and a +1 spell level adjustment.

Besides, hiding spellcasting is already a pair of lame feats:

Spellsong
Secret Signs


mplindustries wrote:
Redchigh wrote:
So RAW, silent and stilled spells are only for being bound and gagged, evidently. That's pretty situational for a pair of feats.
Terrible feats and excellent rods every spellcaster should have.

There's no such thing as a Rod of Still Spell though.


I'd say a Perception roll before you get that Spellcraft roll would not be inappropriate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
I'd say a Perception roll before you get that Spellcraft roll would not be inappropriate.

Actually, it probably is inappropriate. The Spellcraft check already includes the Perception modifiers.

Quote:
Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.


Rules wise, the casting character with silent and stilled spells still has to make a concentration check while casting adjacent to a foe. So, there are obvious signs of a spell being cast. Roleplaying wise, a GM could describe the caster's eyes glowing or wisps of magic light gather to her fingertip as she casts two missiles of force, etc.

Silent spell is useful for when you are hiding and want to cast and stealth. Or you are in a silence spell, gagged, etc. Still spell is nice for when you are bound completely. Or wearing armor (I suppose?).

In the end neither feat says the DC for the spellcraft check to identify the spell is increased. But if the caster is hiding in a large cavern, not being able to hear him cast might make it harder to perceive him :P


Circumstance penalties or the Perception modifiers are the best in-rules way I can think of to make identifying Silenced or stilled spells harder, the unfavorable or terrible conditions specifically.


What Jeraa said.
With that rule in mind i think that it's impossible to identify the spell or even know the spellcaster is casting* unless you have arcane sight on.

i assume that there is no material component


leo1925 wrote:

What Jeraa said.

With that rule in mind i think that it's impossible to identify the spell or even know the spellcaster is casting* unless you have arcane sight on.

i assume that there is no material component

Even with no verbal, somatic, or material component its still obvious you as casting a spell, as you still provoke an attack of opportunity. So whatever it is that still causes the AoO with on components whatsoever, may still make it possible to identify the spell being cast with no components.

The Exchange

A spell is not the same as the means you use to cast it. V/m/s are not part of a spell, they are part of casting a spell.


Jeraa wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
I'd say a Perception roll before you get that Spellcraft roll would not be inappropriate.

Actually, it probably is inappropriate. The Spellcraft check already includes the Perception modifiers.

Quote:
Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.

Yesbut they are two different skills, based upon different stats. The mage with spellcraft first would have to notice the other guy is doing something before he'd have a chance to id it.


Quote:
Yesbut they are two different skills, based upon different stats. The mage with spellcraft first would have to notice the other guy is doing something before he'd have a chance to id it.

Doesn't matter. In this case, its only a single skill check.

It should be two - the Perception check (with the normal penalties)to notice the guy doing something, and the Spellcraft check (with none of the perception penalties) to determine what spell is being cast. But Pathfinder simplified that, just like they simplified Hide and Move Silently into one skill - you almost always use both together anyway.

yes, this does lead to some strange cases. Such as the case where a character has a +0 Perception modifier, and a high Spellcraft modifier. Such a character would have a hard time spotting someone at a distance, but can easily identify what spell someone is casting from the same distance. Or a person who can clearly spot a fly from a mile away not being able to see clearly enough to identify what spell is being cast across the room (High perception, low Spellcraft).

If it was meant to be two separate checks, then the Perception modifiers would not of been included in the Spellcraft check.


Jeraa wrote:
leo1925 wrote:

What Jeraa said.

With that rule in mind i think that it's impossible to identify the spell or even know the spellcaster is casting* unless you have arcane sight on.

i assume that there is no material component

Even with no verbal, somatic, or material component its still obvious you as casting a spell, as you still provoke an attack of opportunity. So whatever it is that still causes the AoO with on components whatsoever, may still make it possible to identify the spell being cast with no components.

It's the fact that you are focusing on the spell, and thus, lacking focus on the combat, that offers the opportunity, not the spell in itself. You're open, and someone can benefit from this opportunity to attack.

Casting spells do not make your eyes glow, or create a sphere of magic (as Baldur's Gate for example) or create a perceptible aura of magic power or anything like that : spell effects might do that (a fireball will be created for example).

A spell that is still and silent will, at my table, provoke a -5 to the spellcraft check by feat (so -5 if still or silent, and -10 if both). That is on the rule part, and is a "terrible condition". I will add that casting can only be detected by Detect magic or other divination (arcane sight, ...) if both are active (but that part is a houserule).
I will not even go for details regarding other modifiers, like the distance, light conditions, and the distracted modifier. Because, you know, manage to recognize a spell being cast while you have to fight 2 guys at once, in the dark, while the caster is 200 feet away is hard. Oh, and that is on the rules too.

It should be noted that a caster casting while invisible provoke a +20 DC to spellcraft checks...

Scarab Sages

SlimGauge wrote:
Redchigh wrote:
So RAW, silent and stilled spells are only for being bound and gagged, evidently. That's pretty situational for a pair of feats.
Or under the effect of a silence spell. Or paralyzed by a ghoul. Still not exactly common, but more useful than simply when bound and gagged.

Bound and gagged also = grappled, pinned, and the grappling ability to silience spell casting.

Underwater casting is made much easier.

Eschew materials is also needed for forgoing the spell component, but overall, the combo of feats - silence and stilled is even more excellent when you have the ability to spontaneously cast and add meta feats on the fly with prefered spell and greater specialized spell.

This way, you never have to worry about casting in one of these conditions.


Jeraa wrote:
Quote:
Yesbut they are two different skills, based upon different stats. The mage with spellcraft first would have to notice the other guy is doing something before he'd have a chance to id it.
If it was meant to be two separate checks, then the Perception modifiers would not of been included in the Spellcraft check.

I don't agree. First of all you must notice that they are doing something worth drawing your attention (which does mean the usual modifiers for ranger, light, etc) then you have to know exactly what it is that they are doing, which incurs the usual modifiers.

Scarab Sages

Since you're looking for house rules stuff --

There is a bardic feat to conceal spellcasting called Spellsong. It allows you to conceal your spellcasting by masking it in a performance. Observers must make a perception or sense motive check, opposed by your perform check, to realize that you are also casting a spell. And it uses 1 round of your bardic performance.

The feat also allows you to use bardic performance to maintain a bard spell with a duration of concentration.

This feat creates two checks for the spell. The first is a perception or sense motive opposed by the caster's perform check. The second is the standard spellcraft roll to identify the spell.

Given that, I might suggest creating a feat for spellcasters who wish to conceal their spellcasting.
Something like this?

Cloaked Casting:

Prerequisites: Still Spell, Silent Spell

Benefits:
A spellcaster with this feat may attempt to conceal the casting of a spell. Select a spell with a casting time no greater than one standard action. You may make a stealth check to conceal the casting of this spell from others. You receive a +2 bonus to the check if the spell is modified by still spell or silent spell, or a +4 bonus if modified by both.
Normal: Spellcasters cannot disguise spellcasting.

If you don't want to make it a feat, then by all means just make it opposed skill checks. However, keep in mind how this may potentially disrupt your campaign, as the party spellcasters hit everyone they encounter with charm person :D


@Magicdealer : Why creating an houserule that is the same as the rule ?

The only choice in the rule is considering Still and Silent as a bad condition (+2 to the test) or a terrible condition (+5 to the test).

Don't forget that Spellcraft is a trained-only skill too.


Nothing special. You can use Spellcraft and Know Arcana also is usable.
(Know:A can ID the spell(s) using specific components, if they are using them, or ID the effect after the fact of casting)
Like people said, you can ad-hoc rule bad condition modifiers for 'missing' components (Silent/Still/Eschew).
But as for Spellcraft, it specifically says you must be able to see the spell being cast,
and normal modifiers to Perception (including distance) apply to that check, so you ARE seeing something,
even though you are still entitled to make this check vs. a Still/Silent/Eschewed spell.
(which is explicitly confirmed by Jason Bulmahn, albeit he also recommends 'bad condition' penalties when missing components)
So that clearly indicates that there IS something you are seeing that is specific to each spellcasting.
Conclusion -> Wayne Reynold's artistic depictions of 'mystic floating runes' associated with spellcasting
ARE a functionally accurate of how spellcasting works, so you might as well adjust your visualizations of it to match.
Such 'mystic floating runes' would be the visually noticeable and spell-specific means to ID a spell, Still/Silent/Eschew or not.

Scarab Sages

Well, for one, the feat I mentioned (Spellsong) requires bardic performance. For two, as far as the rules go still/silent together don't conceal spellcasting. So I provided an example feat that could provide the functionality the OP wanted.


I assumed that the Tricky Spells ability of the arcane trickster PrC was exactly for the purpose of casting while stealthed and remaining undetected, but it does not specify whether or not it is detectable by default.

On an unrelated note, I have exactly this issue with a stealthy psion I GM who doesn't move in order to cast. I assume he can get away with it until he comes across enemies with blindsight and lifesense.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / how to notice a silent / stilled spell? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.