Bard Countersong vs. Witch Cackle

[Theodric de LaMontagne]

I know the wording of Countersong says it only works against a "sonic or language-dependent magical attack" and that "Countersong does not work on effects that don’t allow saves", but thematically if feels like the ability would be a perfect fit to oppose a witch's cackle.

Has anyone encountered this before?

PS: similarly, would you say a silence spell cancels a witch's cackle?

[Deadmanwalking]

Cackle is not a sonic effect. Indeed, nothing prevents it from working in an area of silence. The important thing is the Witch laughs madly, not whether anyone hears them.

So no, countersong does nothing to it.

[AaronUnicorn]

Thematically? I'd allow it.

But RAW don't have anything about a Witch's Cackle being sound-based, or even require that the Witch be able to open their mouth. A pure RAW take on it would say that a Witch can Cackle even while gagged and under the effect of Silence. Or could cackle while trying to use Stealth.

Now, I kind of hate that interpretation, and at my table, if a Witch took Cackle as one of their Minor Hexes, then they darn well need to be able to cackle. I might allow the Cackle to be more like an under the breath wicked chuckle if the Witch really needs to be stealthy about it, but it's definitely sound-based in my mind.

[Theodric de LaMontagne]

By RAW firearms don't make noise either, but we do have this item which sets the records straight...

I'm wondering if cackle is attached to some kind of magic item like that so that an interpretation could be extrapolated...

Hmmm... just found this item which has a cackle effect with the sonic descriptor...

[Brondy]

There is a faq...

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

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."
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9qox

So countersong should work.

[BigNorseWolf]

By any consistent measure of in universe physics, you'd be canceling all spells with verbal components too.

[Val'bryn2]

It does not have a cackle effect. It is described as cackling while having an effect in no way related to the cackle hex. Pure, (for once)simple, RAW, the cackle hex is not sonic and both countersong and silence do nothing.

EDIT: that FAQ ruling makes no sense. Nothing hints or suggests they have to hear you, just that you laugh.

[Theodric de LaMontagne]

Thanks Brondy. I think BigNorseWolf is right though: by RAW only if sonic or language-dependent... but it's interesting that the FAQ treats cackle the same way spells are treated with silence...

[Draven Torakhan]

How the thematic of cackle works, then yes; it should be cancelled out. It unnerves the listener, in effect - so if you can't hear it because your bard is out-shouting them, well.

Other verbal-component spells, I don't know about though. I'd look at them on a case-by-case basis, again based on the effect/thematic. It's magic, and there can be spells where -I- simply need to speak the words, whether my target can hear it or not, simply to activate or visualize the magic I'm casting. In those cases, Countersong wouldn't do much... maybe call for a concentration check, if anything.

[Avoron]

Brondy wrote:

So countersong should work.

Draven Torakhan wrote:

How the thematic of cackle works, then yes; it should be cancelled out.

Well, no, it shouldn't, because as the OP already pointed out, "Countersong does not work on effects that don’t allow saves." And cackle most definitely does not allow a save.

[Val'bryn2]

You say it's thematic because it "unnerves people", but that is only flavor text, not anything about the actual ability. It doesn't have the mind-affecting property, no emotion subtype, so it doesn't actually unnerve people. That argument is like arguing about an outsider being immune to being summoned unwillingly, because flavor text says it can't, when it has no immunities to being called by gate or such.

[Berti Blackfoot]

You could argue the countersong is not really vs the cackle but vs the effect they are trying to extend, and thus probably something that allows a save (even though that other effect might not involve sound). That is a stretch, but since the FAQ changes cackle then maybe that is the intent. But I don't think RAW we really have a clear answer.

[Rajnish Umbra, Shadow Caller]

Brondy wrote:

There is a faq...

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

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."
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9qox

So countersong should work.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

By any consistent measure of in universe physics, you'd be canceling all spells with verbal components too.

Look at the part I cursive'd. (The second line after the edit mark) Other people don't need to hear your verbal components for a spell to take effect, but they do need to hear the cackle.

In theory, this makes it look like a sonic effect. However, it still formally lacks the [Sonic] descriptor, so no official counterspell. But yeah, because of "If the target is in a silence effect, it is unaffected by the cackle.", I'd houserule it to work.