Does using both silent and still metamagic on a spell like charm person prevents someone from noticing you're casting? With the aid of eschew materials, no one would see you moving, talking or using anything suspicious. What happens here?
Look at the spell components. If it has verbal components, someone can hear you muttering words which, after a spellcraft check, will tell them you're casting a spell. If it has somatic components, someone can see you making hand gestures which, after a spellcraft check, will tell them you're casting a spell. If it has material components, someone can see you fondling some eye of newt which, after a spellcraft check, will tell them you're casting a spell.
If you take care of these components with silent spell and still spell and eschew materials, no one will be any the wiser if you cast a spell. However, your GM may rule that they get a perception check to notice you 'concentrationg'.
Cool, my enchanter build will find a lot of use with this.
Psionics can be cast without components pretty esily.
|
Psionics can be cast without components pretty esily.
Psionics are awesome but they aren't spells, and have nothing to do with the OP's question. And even most psionic powers have a noticeable manifestation (a glow, a hum, ectoplasm, etc.)
Removing components does not hide the spell casting. You still provoke and people can still use spell craft to ID your spell.
This, 100%. Even a Quickened spell can be identified with Spellcraft.
Psionics can be cast without components pretty esily.
Which would be useful information if psionics were a thing in first-party Pathfinder.
There's a prestige class somewhere that can hide their spells, but I can't for the life of me remember which one it was.
|
Illusion of Calm is a good way to go. 3.5e had several options for concealed spellcasting, so you may want to look into Cityscape or Complete Scoundrel for details.
There is the feat Secret Signs from the ISWG for spells that have only somatic components.
Amusingly, that feat makes spells with only somatic components harder to detect than spells with no components at all.
There is the feat Secret Signs from the ISWG for spells that have only somatic components.Amusingly, that feat makes spells with only somatic components harder to detect than spells with no components at all.
Does Silent spells qualify for this feat?
Also, this feat seems to imply that there are no noticeable effects when casting a spell, like glowing runes. So, what is the logic in game for silent still spell to be detectable?
the search engine is your friend
why get all those feats...
Assuming you're serious...
You get Still Spell so you can cast when tied up or otherwise unable to move. You get Silent Spell so you can cast when in an area where sound doesn't work such as silence.
In short, you get those feats so you CAN cast in conditions where somatic/verbal components aren't permitted. Which is a pretty big deal.
So, what is the logic in game for silent still spell to be detectable?
The logic is:
Normally, if you cast a spell it provokes, even from a dumb zombie that has no brain to understand what a spell is. Normally, if you cast a spell, anyone with Spellcraft can make a roll with no penalties, not even distance penalties, to figure out what spell you're casting.
That is the general rule for spellcasting. It always applies unless you find a specific rule that explicitly changes it.
Also:
The Silent Spell feat and the Still Spell feat have no explicit text that changes the general rule. So while these feats can make some components unnecessary, you still provoke and you can still have your spell identified with Spellcraft at no penalty.
By RAW.
Does it make sense? Maybe not. What is the logic for doing it this way? Probably an oversight. I personally think that both of those feats should add bonuses to your Cast Defensively roll and both of those feats should impose penalties to Spellcraft checks to identify your spell.
But even with those two suggested house rules, that still does not explicitly say that your casting is invisible and undetectable to observers.
So you would need a third house rule (or make it the first one if you wish skip the previous two) that says that casting a spell with no component is impossible for observers to detect. Or make your house rule tie into a Perception check if you don't like "impossible". Or whatever.
But those are just house rules. Without them, the general condition still stands: when you cast a spell with any number of components (including zero components), everyone knows you are casting something and can react accordingly with AoOs, Spellcraft rolls, or just shouting for the guards to come arrest this enchanter running around town beguiling decent citizens.
Actually, per the Spellcraft skill rules, any Perception penalties due to distance, poor lighting conditions, etc. do apply to Spellcraft checks made to identify a spell as it is being cast.