Identifying a Spells with Spellcraft


Rules Questions

401 to 450 of 756 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>

Milo v3 wrote:
Well, with "but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast." there has to be a way to see the spell before it's finished being cast simply because it says "as it is being cast.".

Yes, but the "way" was not clear, and many of us assumed it was through the components of the spell.


The FAQ says that the spells give enough to a spellcraft check, not that that a spell was cast to the untrained eye. Maybe people without spellcraft ranks can´t tell who cast the spell or where it was cast or who was the target.


jimibones83 wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
Well, with "but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast." there has to be a way to see the spell before it's finished being cast simply because it says "as it is being cast.".
Yes, but the "way" was not clear, and many of us assumed it was through the components of the spell.

But that interpretation also leads to questions.

If it's based on components, then does it matter which components? Shouldn't a V only spell be harder to id than one with VSM? Does V count at all, since you have to see it?


Draco Bahamut wrote:
The FAQ says that the spells give enough to a spellcraft check, not that that a spell was cast to the untrained eye. Maybe people without spellcraft ranks can´t tell who cast the spell or where it was cast or who was the target.
FAQ wrote:
Whatever the case, these manifestations are obviously magic of some kind, even to the uninitiated; this prevents spellcasters that use spell-like abilities, psychic magic, and the like from running completely amok against non-spellcasters in a non-combat situation.

The FAQ answer doesn't actually mention Spellcraft, though it's obviously implied.


PłentaX wrote:

if the Guard know that you casting Charm person on him he can feel "threatened" about it +5 to his saving throw

Sald wrote:


That's what the rest of the party is for.

The Wizard pretends to be casting a spell of some sort on one of his party members, who also pretends to be the willing recipient of the spell. Since the duration of Charm Person is hours per level, the party has plenty of time to play up this act, placing a separation between the apparent spell casting and the interaction with the gate guard.

Might require something like a Bluff check against the un-charmed guard, but as a GM, I'd give it a legitimate chance of working, with potential bonuses to the check if the party made efforts that would seem believable.

Only if the guard had enough ranks in Spellcraft to appropriately identify that Charm Person was the spell being cast and also to somehow identify that he were the subject of the spell. That's the point of the mummery; make people observing believe that an accomplice is the willing subject of whatever spell is being cast instead of whatever is the actual target.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
alexd1976 wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:
Or, you know... walk around a corner before you cast.
Losing both line of sight and line of effect? yeah... that complicates spellcasting a bit.

Only if you're casting the spell on someone else.

Personally, I don't believe 'stealth disintegrate' should be a thing. If you're casting a spell on someone they should know about it and be able to respond.

Otherwise you're creating some kind of crazy martial/caster disparity where everyone knows and can respond when a martial character attacks them, but casters can stand in a crowd and launch attacks with impunity.


Wizard *casts charm spell on guard 1*
Guard 1: Hey. You remember me of my uncle Joe. You can pass.
Guard 2: Wait a minute. What was that spell just before Guard 1 let you pass ?
Wizard : Spell ? Didn´t see any spell.
Guard 1: Yeah. My friend would never cast a spell on me. Maybe a pixie is pranking.
Guard 2: No, i am certain he casted something.
Wizard : Oh, you mean my voice turning gravery and my eyes shinning and a small pinkish heart getting out of my hands and circling Guard 1 ?
Guard 2: Yeah. That one.
Wizard : I just cast a spell to see if he were charmed. I heard there is a wizard walking around charming guards in this kingdom. But he is ok. *bluff*
Guard 2: *sense motive* Hmmm. I don´t believe it.
Guard 1: Hey mister friend. Could you cast the same spell on my friend ? Maybe he is ensorceled! You are the only one i can trust.
Guard 2: Guard 1, you are acting strange. He must have charmed you.
Guard 1: No, you are the one charmed. Don´t worry bud, i ll save you. *punch guard 2*
Guard 2: Are you out of yer mind ?! Wait, where the strange did go ?
Guard 1: He was not a strange to me, i let him pass.
Guard 2: Now we are in trouble... Well, if anyone asks, i ll just say he charmed both of us.
Guard 1: I am not charmed !
*both guards get back to guard duty*


Bahamut wrote:
Wizard *casts charm spell on guard 1*

NOPE i will fix this for you

Wizard *casts charm spell on guard 1*
Guard 1: Hey. You remember me of my uncle Joe. You can pass.
Guard 2: Wait a minute. What was that spell just before Guard 1 let you pass ?
Wizard : Spell ? Didn´t see any spell.
Guard 1: Yeah. My friend would never cast a spell on me. Maybe a pixie is pranking.
Guard 2: No, i am certain he casted something.
Wizard : Oh, you mean my voice turning gravery and my eyes shinning and a small pinkish heart getting out of my hands and circling guard 1 ?
Guard 2: Yeah. That one.
Wizard : I just casted a spell to see if any of you were charmed. i heard there is a wizard walking around charming guards in the kingdom. But he is ok. *bluff*
Guard 2: *sense motive* Hmmm. I don´t believe it.
Guard 1: Hey mister friend. Could you cast the same spell on my frind ? Maybe he is ensorceled! You are the only one i can trust.
Guard 2: Guard 1, you are strange. He must charmed you.
Guard 1: No, you are the one charmed. Don´t worry bud, i ll save you. *punch guard 2*
Guard 2: SOUND ALARM !! caster do something to my friend guard

*Wizard land in jail*


I was the GM. I just thought it wound be funnier that way. If the plot needed that the players pass, they will pass.


i think that my version is more realistic ;D (ofc its only my opinion you can disagree kind Sir)


Disintegrate actually lists visual effects though... Still and Silent wouldnt change that...


Hey. I already heard about security guards saying such excuses because they let someone they shouldn´t have get in in real life. Con artists are that good.
We are not talking elite guards. They became ashamed of failing and prefer to believe they were charmed than adimit they made a mistake.
Depending on the guard, they really should pretend to not notice the charm and raise the alarm afterwards.
Adventures really shouldn ´t be just casting charm person their way into trained guards anyway.


alexd1976 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:

"Aww man, you ain't gotta charm me, we're already best buds!"

If enchantment spells don't cloud your mind, what DO they do?

They do what they say they do. Nothing about clouding minds...
Seeing the caster as a friend when he really isn't is not an example of a clouded mind?
And specifically, "perceives your words and actions in the most favorable way" means he's not going to be suspicious of you casting a spell. Because that wouldn't be the most favorable way to perceive your action.

The second guard might wonder why his partner was so friendly to this total stranger though... The reaction of the one being charmed is only relevant in the context of how the second guard sees it.

Charm Person makes you friendly, it doesn't impart KNOWLEDGE about the caster... These are total strangers walking up to the gate, after all...

so...

Guards 1 and 2, lets call them Lester and Frank:

1-PCs approach gate, guards stop them
2-PCs charm Frank (revealing that a spell has been cast, as it has a visual effect)
3-Frank tries to convince Lester to let the group in. Lester, having just witnessed a spell being cast, and seeing his usually professional/competent friend Frank acting VERY out of character, decides these two events might... just might... be connected.
4-Assuming Lester survives the ensuing melee, he likely gets promoted, as he has performed his job of Guard successfully (by identifying a potential threat to the town/castle/whatever).

Run your games how you like, making all spells visible isn't something I like, nor do any of my players like it. We believe concealed casting should be obtainable, so we have made it so.

Frank would 't act out of character. He would react like frank would react to a close friend. Nif he would react professionally to a close friend, he would react that way to his new close friend too.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Casting a spell in front of the uninitiated will likely cause one of two things to happen: the uninitiated to run away, or to defend themselves.

In the guard example above, if you are within arm's reach, and cast a cantrip, you're going to get your head chopped off before you can complete it.

It's like pointing a realistic-looking toy gun at a cop in real life; just because the gun was a fake doesn't mean you aren't going to get shot.

I can't help but think suddenly casting any spell in public will make people nervous.


Ravingdork wrote:

Casting a spell in front of the uninitiated will likely cause one of two things to happen: the uninitiated to run away, or to defend themselves.

In the guard example above, if you are within arm's reach, and cast a cantrip, you're going to get your head chopped off before you can complete it.

It's like pointing a realistic-looking toy gun at a cop in real life; just because the gun was a fake doesn't mean you aren't going to get shot.

I can't help but think suddenly casting any spell in public will make people nervous.

Invisible pixies will have so much fun in life from now on...

What would happen if a tiny invisible caster is on the same square of someone and casts on surprise ? Is possible to know who exactly is casting the spell ?


Ravingdork wrote:

Casting a spell in front of the uninitiated will likely cause one of two things to happen: the uninitiated to run away, or to defend themselves.

In the guard example above, if you are within arm's reach, and cast a cantrip, you're going to get your head chopped off before you can complete it.

It's like pointing a realistic-looking toy gun at a cop in real life; just because the gun was a fake doesn't mean you aren't going to get shot.

I can't help but think suddenly casting any spell in public will make people nervous.

Makes identifying, and subsequently burning, Witches a LOT easier.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
I can't help but think suddenly casting any spell in public will make people nervous.

Circumstances.

Usually, swinging an axe around in public will make people nervous. However, if I've got a pile of short logs and I'm making a pile of kindling from them, no-one will be particularly nervous unless they're forced to stand adjacent to me (never know when I'm going to mis-hit one if I have a senior moment and forget to take 10).

If I'm at Mischel's Magic Crafting Mart, I'd expect lots of castings of Detect Magic and uses of the appraise skill.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
Draco Bahamut wrote:

Invisible pixies will have so much fun in life from now on...

What would happen if a tiny invisible caster is on the same square of someone and casts on surprise ? Is possible to know who exactly is casting the spell ?

Better question: Can my illusionist cast an illusion of the the tell-tale signs of a spell being cast (whatever those happen to be) around someone else ?


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
SlimGauge wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
I can't help but think suddenly casting any spell in public will make people nervous.

Circumstances.

Usually, swinging an axe around in public will make people nervous. However, if I've got a pile of short logs and I'm making a pile of kindling from them, no-one will be particularly nervous unless they're forced to stand adjacent to me.

If I'm at Mischel's Magic Crafting Mart, I'd expect lots of castings of Detect Magic and uses of the appraise skill.

A fair point.


Ravingdork wrote:

Casting a spell in front of the uninitiated will likely cause one of two things to happen: the uninitiated to run away, or to defend themselves.

In the guard example above, if you are within arm's reach, and cast a cantrip, you're going to get your head chopped off before you can complete it.

It's like pointing a realistic-looking toy gun at a cop in real life; just because the gun was a fake doesn't mean you aren't going to get shot.

I can't help but think suddenly casting any spell in public will make people nervous.

Maybe, but anyone casting anything will create magic. And unless you have ranks in spellcraft, it all "looks the same". You create water cause you're thirsty? Magic. Detect evil? Magic. Guidance? Magic. Mage hand cause you're lazy? Magic. Open/Close cause you're lazy? Magic. Prestidigitation on you're way to a date? Magic. Getting dark out so you cast light? Magic. Cast guidance on somebody going to build and have to balance? Magic

There's a whole bunch of 0 level spells that people may cast in a city. So maybe the whole magical display is pretty normalish and doesn't elicit extra alarm.


PłentaX wrote:


Bahamut wrote:
Wizard *casts charm spell on guard 1*
NOPE i will fix this for you

How' bout this:

{Party walks towards gates. About 30-odd feet from the gates, the following occurs.}

Rogue (in conversational voice loud enough to be heard by guards): Hey, Mr. Wizard, could you cast that spell that makes me look cuter to the ladies? Sally the chambermaid is inside, and while you guys are conducting business, I kind of want to chat her up a bit.

Wizrd: Sure, friend Rogue. I know you've had the hots for her for a while. Haha...you're going to need all the help you can get; she's way out of your league.

{Wizard casts Charm Person targeting one of the guards while facing the Rogue and pretending to cast the spell on his friend. The rest of the party makes ribald jokes about the Rogue's lack of game. Once done, the party then proceeds towards the gates to speak to the guards about entry to the castle.}

In this case, at the very least, the party would have a Bluff check opportunity to make the non-target guard believe that the spell casting was harmless to him and/or his allies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Casting is not an intrinsicly hostile action. As pointed out above, cantrips probably fly around pretty frequently. Most people have no idea what spells actually do without ranks in spellcraft.

All of the situations given are possible interpretations, based on the individual guard's character and skill checks. That does not make charm person an auto win or useless it's just another spell that works some of the time, like any other spell. Unless every single one of the guards in your game is the exact same person, you will get different results every time you try this strategy. For example, in my campaign charming a town guard would have a pretty high success chance while charming a personal guard of the queen would most likely fail. Both still depend on how the situation is handled (roleplaying) and some skill checks, but the situations are far different. You cannot blanket statement the entire usefulness of charm person with a single example.


Have your friend fall out of a high window near the guards. (not high enough to be lethal though) and then cast "cure light" as you charm them


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
Casting is not an intrinsicly hostile action. As pointed out above, cantrips probably fly around pretty frequently. Most people have no idea what spells actually do without ranks in spellcraft.

Tell that to a Ustalavian farmer!

If you live in a magocracy or something, I can understand people being less nervous about it, but ignorance breeds fear and suspician, and people without ranks in Spellcraft are ignorant by default.


SlimGauge wrote:


If I'm at Mischel's Magic Crafting Mart, I'd expect lots of castings of Detect Magic and uses of the appraise skill.

I am pretty sure, all the clerics are casting guidance all the time, if they prepare it.


Chess Pwn wrote:
Have your friend fall out of a high window near the guards. (not high enough to be lethal though) and then cast "cure light" as you charm them

Haha...or use Disguise to make him look injured, then use "healing magic" so he's at his best for the "meeting with the Duke" for which the party was "summoned to the castle."


Ravingdork wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
Casting is not an intrinsicly hostile action. As pointed out above, cantrips probably fly around pretty frequently. Most people have no idea what spells actually do without ranks in spellcraft.

Tell that to a Ustalavian farmer!

If you live in a magocracy or something, I can understand people being less nervous about it, but ignorance breeds fear and suspician, and people without ranks in Spellcraft are ignorant by default.

Possibly. Depending on the setting and the individual character. It's all subject to circumstance. My only point is that you can't have a blanket statement for the usefulness of charm person, or any spell for that matter.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
My only point is that you can't have a blanket statement for the usefulness of charm person, or any spell for that matter.

I would have thought that, that goes without saying, Carl.


Ravingdork wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
My only point is that you can't have a blanket statement for the usefulness of charm person, or any spell for that matter.
I would have thought that, that goes without saying, Carl.

You would think, but alex seems to think otherwise. Hence me trying to prove this point.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even without this FAQ, if you walked up to a couple guards and cast Charm Person on one of them, you just provoked two AoOs. Why? You're casting. I'm pretty sure you can speak to them without provoking (speech doesn't provoke) and you can wiggle your fingers without provoking (finger wiggling doesn't provoke).

So, you could literally walk up to the guards and talk while wiggling your fingers and NOT provoke.

But if you do that while casting a spell, your speech is now a verbal component and your finger wiggling is a somatic component, both guards will smack you with an AoO. There is no way two guys guarding something important are going to wait to see what spell this total stranger is casting. Could be Disintegrate, or Circle of Death, or Baleful Polymorph or any of a thousand other nasty things. Nope, they just swing away when you provoke.

So there is now, and was before, and always has been SOMETHING that differentiates casting (which provokes) and merely speaking while wiggling fingers.

All the FAQ did was clarify what it is.

And for those of you who suggested the guards would just stand there and let the guy cast, well, guards in your world are either stupid or excruciatingly gullible - neither of which bodes well for their chosen career path.

And, finally, if you stop out of threat range and cast the same Charm Person, it still provokes but there is nobody in range to take the AoO. It's not like it suddenly counts as being unseeable just because your 5' further away. It's still the same action, still the same AoO-provoking action, regardless of whether the guards are in reach or not. Which means it doesn't matter if you're 5' away, or 10' away, or 100' away, when you start casting your spell, there is still SOMETHING that differentiates casting (which provokes) and merely speaking while wiggling fingers, and the guards can still see it (subject to distance penalties, perhaps).

And they always could before the FAQ, too.


jimibones83 wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
Well, with "but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast." there has to be a way to see the spell before it's finished being cast simply because it says "as it is being cast.".
Yes, but the "way" was not clear, and many of us assumed it was through the components of the spell.

So.... you guys are arguing "No The Spell shouldn't happen until after the casting is finished" and "The components that happen before the casting is finished are The Spell." at the same time... That's ridiculous.

It says you can see The spell. Not handwaving that causes the spell, the spell itself.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
DM_Blake wrote:
Even without this FAQ, if you walked up to a couple guards and cast Charm Person on one of them, you just provoked two AoOs. Why?

It provokes because you dropped your guard to concentrate on casting the spell.

The guard took the attack of opportunity because he knows that finger waggling and strange mumbling means he is casting a spell--likely to do something harmful.

Before the FAQ that is.


You also provoke from your party members every time you walk past them to check your pack. That doesn't mean they take the AoO. Same with the guards. They would only take the AoO of they wanted to. Assuming they have combat reflexes and can take AoOs while flat footed.


Ravingdork wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Even without this FAQ, if you walked up to a couple guards and cast Charm Person on one of them, you just provoked two AoOs. Why?

It provokes because you dropped your guard to concentrate on casting the spell.

The guard took the attack of opportunity because he knows that finger waggling and strange mumbling means he is casting a spell--likely to do something harmful.

Before the FAQ that is.

Note that it still provokes without the finger waggling and strange mumbling.

Even a Silent Still Charm Person provokes.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
You also provoke from your party members every time you walk past them to check your pack. That doesn't mean they take the AoO. Same with the guards. They would only take the AoO of they wanted to. Assuming they have combat reflexes and can take AoOs while flat footed.

If someone walked up to you, was standing right in front of you, and began casting a spell while staring and motioning directly at you, what would you do?

If nothing else, you would disrupt the caster's concentration, break the spell, and demand to know what the hell he was doing--that or you'd run away and hope for the best.


Ravingdork wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
You also provoke from your party members every time you walk past them to check your pack. That doesn't mean they take the AoO. Same with the guards. They would only take the AoO of they wanted to. Assuming they have combat reflexes and can take AoOs while flat footed.
If someone walked up to you, was standing right in front of you, and began casting a spell while staring and motioning directly at you, what would you do?

I do not have enough information to answer the question. It depends on the scenario. This question is a perfect example of how your questions are fundamentally flawed.

Ravingdork wrote:
If nothing else, you would disrupt the caster's concentration, break the spell, and demand to know what the hell he was doing--that or you'd run away and hope for the best.

Actually, I prefer to act how I would act, not how others tell me I would act.

There are certainly some NPCs who would do that.

There are a numbers of other who would not.

Stop generalizing.


Ravingdork wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Even without this FAQ, if you walked up to a couple guards and cast Charm Person on one of them, you just provoked two AoOs. Why?

It provokes because you dropped your guard to concentrate on casting the spell.

The guard took the attack of opportunity because he knows that finger waggling and strange mumbling means he is casting a spell--likely to do something harmful.

Before the FAQ that is.

So this works for you:

GM: A stranger walks up to you. He seems lost in thought as if he's distracted by something, and his finger is twitching.
PC: Kill him! Kill him now before he disintegrates our children!

If so, then people in your game world might be a couple orders of magnitude more paranoid, and murderous, than those lovely witch-hunters at Salem were.

And that doesn't mesh with the fact that anyone with spellcraft can automatically attempt to identify EVERY spell, even with Still/Silent/Eschew, because he could see the spell, during casting, before it's fully cast. Per RAW, as printed in the 2009 Core Rulebook. If spellcasting is visible enough for that, then it's visible enough for the guard's AoO without him having to be a paranoid trigger-happy mass murderer.


Ravingdork wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
You also provoke from your party members every time you walk past them to check your pack. That doesn't mean they take the AoO. Same with the guards. They would only take the AoO of they wanted to. Assuming they have combat reflexes and can take AoOs while flat footed.

If someone walked up to you, was standing right in front of you, and began casting a spell while staring and motioning directly at you, what would you do?

If nothing else, you would disrupt the caster's concentration, break the spell, and demand to know what the hell he was doing--that or you'd run away and hope for the best.

Which, of course, is why you don't do that.

As others have suggested, you do it at range, apparently on one of your companions or yourself.

If you're in a setting where casting is illegal, then you've got more problems, but there have been several scenarios proposed far more likely than walk up and cast in the guard's face.


thejeff wrote:
If you're in a setting where casting is illegal, then you've got more problems, but there have been several scenarios proposed far more likely than walk up and cast in the guard's face.

This is really the biggest problem with the FAQ. It makes 'magic is illegal' scenarios much more difficult to run if there is no way to hide spellcasting.


_Ozy_ wrote:
thejeff wrote:
If you're in a setting where casting is illegal, then you've got more problems, but there have been several scenarios proposed far more likely than walk up and cast in the guard's face.
This is really the biggest problem with the FAQ. It makes 'magic is illegal' scenarios much more difficult to run if there is no way to hide spellcasting.

OTOH, if you're running very non-standard settings, house rule away.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
DM_Blake wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Even without this FAQ, if you walked up to a couple guards and cast Charm Person on one of them, you just provoked two AoOs. Why?

It provokes because you dropped your guard to concentrate on casting the spell.

The guard took the attack of opportunity because he knows that finger waggling and strange mumbling means he is casting a spell--likely to do something harmful.

Before the FAQ that is.

So this works for you:

GM: A stranger walks up to you. He seems lost in thought as if he's distracted by something, and his finger is twitching.
PC: Kill him! Kill him now before he disintegrates our children!

If I had ranks in Spellcraft and could identify his somatic component as belonging to a disintegrate spell, then yes, I might react...similarly. If I didn't have ranks in Spellcraft, and was more or less uninitiated in the ways of magic, than I still might surmise that he is casting a spell, and might mean to do me harm.

If he was a rogue trying to spook me with a fake spell, then being uninitiated, I might be nervous as well (as I would not know the difference).


Ravingdork wrote:
I just love how Paizo has gotten into the habit of creating new rules that limit game options prior to releasing new products that expand said options again at the expenditure of more character resources. /sarcasm

They're not even being subtle about it anymore. The FAQ even has an advertisement for Ultimate Intrigue included in the text.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I wouldn't sell their subtlety short, they made basically the same ruling all of 5 years ago, shortly after PRPG was released, and Raving Dork et al where so bamboozled they were unaware of the ruling up until now when it hit the Official FAQ page... In fact, since even direct mention of said ruling seemed to be ignored by the "true defenders of objective game design", Paizo must have targeted "true defenders of objective game design" with a malevolently implanted hypnotic command to avoid the truth. It's almost Kafka-esque.

But please, brothers and sisters, defenders of truth, if you find that I do not return to this thread, know that it must be that the evil tentacles of Paizo have gotten to me, have finally silenced one more defender of the truth. Do not despair, the struggle will continue! Even if you find yourself unable to recall official rulings, or more strangely, you CAN recall them yet you find yourself strangely unmotivated to acknowledge how their impact your argument... Almost like Charm Person... Know that Paizo's evil powers may be able to warp even the mind of man, but can never touch the eternal unshining truth for which we all strive.


Quandary wrote:

I wouldn't sell their subtlety short, they made basically the same ruling all of 5 years ago, shortly after PRPG was released, and Raving Dork et al where so bamboozled they were unaware of the ruling up until now when it hit the Official FAQ page... In fact, since even direct mention of said ruling seemed to be ignored by the "true defenders of objective game design", Paizo must have targeted "true defenders of objective game design" with a malevolently implanted hypnotic command to avoid the truth. It's almost Kafka-esque.

But please, brothers and sisters, defenders of truth, if you find that I do not return to this thread, know that it must be that the evil tentacles of Paizo have gotten to me, have finally silenced one more defender of the truth. Do not despair, the struggle will continue! Even if you find yourself unable to recall official rulings, or more strangely, you CAN recall them yet you find yourself strangely unmotivated to acknowledge how their impact your argument... Almost like Charm Person... Know that Paizo's evil powers may be able to warp even the mind of man, but can never touch the eternal unshining truth for which we all strive.

This was pretty good.

Except we all know that Paizo could not have cast that spell on us. We would have known. After all, we could see the sparkles while they cast it.


Bahahaha, well put!


Ravingdork wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
You also provoke from your party members every time you walk past them to check your pack. That doesn't mean they take the AoO. Same with the guards. They would only take the AoO of they wanted to. Assuming they have combat reflexes and can take AoOs while flat footed.

If someone walked up to you, was standing right in front of you, and began casting a spell while staring and motioning directly at you, what would you do?

If nothing else, you would disrupt the caster's concentration, break the spell, and demand to know what the hell he was doing--that or you'd run away and hope for the best.

I haven't acted yet, so I'm flat footed and can't take an AOO to stop him. :P


Ian Bell wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
You also provoke from your party members every time you walk past them to check your pack. That doesn't mean they take the AoO. Same with the guards. They would only take the AoO of they wanted to. Assuming they have combat reflexes and can take AoOs while flat footed.

If someone walked up to you, was standing right in front of you, and began casting a spell while staring and motioning directly at you, what would you do?

If nothing else, you would disrupt the caster's concentration, break the spell, and demand to know what the hell he was doing--that or you'd run away and hope for the best.

I haven't acted yet, so I'm flat footed and can't take an AOO to stop him. :P

Roll initiative.


Quandary, your arrogance is unnecessary. Paizo ruled to your liking, we get it. But many people misunderstood, which proves it was not clear. I'm not so sure why its such a big deal to you.

I wasn't playing PF 5 years ago, so I wasn't around for that ruling. As for the rule printed in the CRB, it states that you have to see the spell being cast, that's all. In 3.5, where I had just fled from, that meant you had to see the components. Being that the PF rule, as written, could be played the same as the 3.5 rule, there was no reason not to do so.

The source of confusion is obvious.


Hmm, does this make wands more valuable? AFAIK, you don't get spellcraft checks to detect the spell coming out of a wand, so presumably there is no outward manifestation that you are activating a spell completion item.

What about scrolls?


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
jimibones83 wrote:

Quandary, your arrogance is unnecessary. Paizo ruled to your liking, we get it. But many people misunderstood, which proves it was not clear. I'm not so sure why its such a big deal to you.

I wasn't playing PF 5 years ago, so I wasn't around for that ruling. As for the rule printed in the CRB, it states that you have to see the spell being cast, that's all. In 3.5, where I had just fled from, that meant you had to see the components. Being that the PF rule, as written, could be played the same as the 3.5 rule, there was no reason not to do so.

The source of confusion is obvious.

I didn't really misunderstand. The developers have been quite clear about their intent for a long time now. Up until they made it official with this FAQ, I just flat out refused to accept their interpretations of the RAW. Even now, though I'm forced to accept it as official, I refuse to acknowledge it as anything less than a change to the rules as written. It affects the way thousands of roleplayers play the game. Just because some have always played it that way, doesn't in any way reduce the impact this ruling has on the rest of us. And we're plenty pissed about that.

Guess I'm turning into an old Grognard who just can't bring himself around to accept the way the game is changing. Hell, I'm even spouting off Paizo conspiracy theories now.

401 to 450 of 756 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Identifying a Spells with Spellcraft All Messageboards