Gauss and I recently had a friendly conversation where he pointed out that the 3.5 rules are much clearer on Knowledge: Arcana than the Pathfinder PRD:
20 + spell level Identify a spell that’s already in place and in effect. You must be able to see or detect the effects of the spell. No action required. No retry.
Knowledge DC Checks: Identify a spell effect that is in place Arcana 20 + spell level
I accepted Gauss' assertion that this meant that Detect Magic and a Knowledge: Arcana roll was insufficient to determine that a succubus had been polymorphed, and considered the case closed.
My co-GM vehemently disagrees. He feels that the Paizo staff intentionally removed the "You must be able to see or detect the effects" so as to make it easier for PCs to determine what buffs an enemy has up, etc. (Assuming they get the 3 full rounds of Detect Magic.)
I'd love opinions. I have the luxury of examining a polymorphed succubus using Detect Magic for 3 rounds, and I make a DC 25 Knowledge: Arcana check.
What do I learn? Solely that she has a transmutation spell on her, or that she has Polymorph on her?
I have no fish to fry in this debate. I liked Gauss' reasoning. But as I said, my co-GM disagrees, so I'm throwing the question to the wolves, and wallowing in my own metaphors...
LINKIES:
The original discussion.
The requisite succubus thread.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can see the effects of the spell - you're looking at a succubus who has polymorphed. Regardless of which version of the Knowledge:Arcana rules you use, if you can detect that there is a spell in effect (such as with the Detect Magic spell), you'll be able to identify the spell with a Knowledge:Arcana roll.
Using Detect Magic is going to take some time. You cast Detect Magic (because it's unlikely you're spending your time slowly walking around concentrating on a spell). You spend six seconds staring intently at her (i.e., using the "redirect a spell" move equivalent action). Then, you know that there's magic radiating off of her. You spend ANOTHER six seconds staring at her (which she very likely notices because of her ridiculously high perception) and you find out that she has at least one and probably more magical auras on her (good chance she has Detect Thoughts going or a magic item or three on her). A third round, now you've spent nearly 20 seconds staring intently at her while concentrating at a spell - now you get to roll a Knowledge(Arcana) check to determine what schools of magic each of her magic auras are. NOW you can try to identify the spell with Knowledge:Arcana.
If she at any time during that steps behind a brick wall, someone in a suit of armor, a rather large tree, or moves more than 60' from you - your study of her is broken. Tough luck, bub!
If she gets paranoid and attacks you (as CE demons are want to do) or decides to seduce you and eat your soul (as succubi are want to do) or dominate you and tell you to look in the other direction (a perfectly reasonable command for dominate unlike, say, attacking your friend) or teleports away then you aren't going to get to continue your study.
That's the crux of Gauss' argument (and hopefully he'll step in to defend himself at some point): Polymorph has no visible "effects"; the creature has simply transformed into a different creature.
If you say that's an "effect", you win!
Since the polymorph may confuse the issue, let's look for something that's truly "invisible" like Bull's Strength.
You leave the room, your paranoid cleric casts a metamagicked Silent Bull's Strength on Lazy Joe, who does nothing but sit in his armchair.
Can you determine that Bull's Strength has been cast on Lazy Joe?
The crux of the argument is:
What does it mean to "detect the effects of a spell"? Is Detect Magic enough?
I'm not trying to be ornery -- I'm enjoying the debates, especially since you and Gauss are at opposing sides, and both of you make excellent arguments.
Now, time to kick Lazy Joe out of that armchair and get myself a seat!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's okay, you can have the chair, I'd rather lay on the floor anyway, too much effort in sitting up:-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Judge Smails: "Don't you people have HOMES?"
I'd probably have more but I try to use them more then once, although a couple are my daughter, and one I'm holding in reserve in case my wife joins in :-) otherwise I try to make sure they aren't one joke ponies:-D
That's the crux of Gauss' argument (and hopefully he'll step in to defend himself at some point): Polymorph has no visible "effects"; the creature has simply transformed into a different creature.
If you say that's an "effect", you win!
Since the polymorph may confuse the issue, let's look for something that's truly "invisible" like Bull's Strength.
You leave the room, your paranoid cleric casts a metamagicked Silent Bull's Strength on Lazy Joe, who does nothing but sit in his armchair.
Can you determine that Bull's Strength has been cast on Lazy Joe?
The crux of the argument is:
What does it mean to "detect the effects of a spell"? Is Detect Magic enough?
I'm not trying to be ornery -- I'm enjoying the debates, especially since you and Gauss are at opposing sides, and both of you make excellent arguments.
Now, time to kick Lazy Joe out of that armchair and get myself a seat!
To detect the effects of the spell would be to identify what the spell did as a result of casting it.
I wouldn't go so far as to say the Knowledge check will tell you exactly what spell it is that does that. (That's what Spellcraft is for, which is its own check.)
The Knowledge check should tell you that she's under some sort of magic that has changed her physical form and the statistical ramifications regarding such a change, but you aren't sure if it's a Disguise spell, an Alter Self spell, Beast Shape I-IV, etc. unless your PC makes a Spellcraft check to determine what spell would correspond with the effects you detected with the Knowledge check. Ironically enough, a Spellcraft check would only tell you what the spell is, and not what it does.
That being said, your other example doesn't mean that Bull's Strength doesn't have any undetectable effects, that's not what the Silent metamagic does. It allows you to cast without needing Verbal Components to fulfill the spell being cast.
That's the crux of Gauss' argument (and hopefully he'll step in to defend himself at some point): Polymorph has no visible "effects"; the creature has simply transformed into a different creature.
If you say that's an "effect", you win!
Since the polymorph may confuse the issue, let's look for something that's truly "invisible" like Bull's Strength.
You leave the room, your paranoid cleric casts a metamagicked Silent Bull's Strength on Lazy Joe, who does nothing but sit in his armchair.
Can you determine that Bull's Strength has been cast on Lazy Joe?
The crux of the argument is:
What does it mean to "detect the effects of a spell"? Is Detect Magic enough?
I'm not trying to be ornery -- I'm enjoying the debates, especially since you and Gauss are at opposing sides, and both of you make excellent arguments.
Now, time to kick Lazy Joe out of that armchair and get myself a seat!
Detect Magic is going to tell you that, yes, there is a transmutation spell in effect on the subject. At that point, it seems clear to me that you're detecting the effects of the spell.
That being said, your other example doesn't mean that Bull's Strength doesn't have any undetectable effects, that's not what the Silent metamagic does. It allows you to cast without needing Verbal Components to fulfill the spell being cast.
Nah; the only reason I mentioned it being Silent was to avoid the inevitable, "I make my Perception check! Problem solved!" that some reprobate like Captain Yesterday would post...
Shows what you know I only roll one's for perception:-D
That being said, your other example doesn't mean that Bull's Strength doesn't have any undetectable effects, that's not what the Silent metamagic does. It allows you to cast without needing Verbal Components to fulfill the spell being cast.Nah; the only reason I mentioned it being Silent was to avoid the inevitable, "I make my Perception check! Problem solved!" that some reprobate
like Captain Yesterdaywould post...
Perception could work if they saw him before and then after the spell is cast. (And no, I'm not talking about them hearing the spell being cast and all that.) But it's tricky, because you'd only know there's a spell enhancing them, tops.
According to my understanding of the pathfinder rules, with 3 rounds of detect magic and a successful knowledge check you would be able to find out that Lazy Joe is under the effects of a transmutation spell that increases his physical strength. It would be up to the players after that to play a guessing game as to what spell is actually in place.
"Ironically enough, a Spellcraft check would only tell you what the spell is, and not what it does."
A spellcraft check is only applicable in certain situations, such as when the spell is being cast. Since it has already been cast spellcraft would do nothing here per RAW.
Polymorph has no visible "effects"; the creature has simply transformed into a different creature.
That certainly sounds like a visible effect to me.