Is this a typo? It lists this spell as only being able to be cast on friendly targets. Is this spell no longer offensive in nature > stopping verbal casters?
Thanks
Thanks!
To be honest I do consider the low level variant of the spell quite butchered in PF2. Removing the ground and enemy targets removed all offensive / disruptive capabilities and reducing the duration to 1min removed almost all "exploration" related capabilities. Might be ok situationally e.g. in combination with invisibility or when a creature can't perceive you properly other than using hearing.
In a way its more powerful than 1E in that there is no saving throw. Cast the 4th level version on a Martial and have them get within range of an enemy spell caster to assist in shutting down said enemy spellcaster.
I think I might add some flexibility back to it via Heightening.
The PF1 saving throw didn't matter if you cast it on an ally or object and put them near a spell caster.
It was a time honored tactic of casting silence on your BSF and having them stay near a spell caster.
Now, the PF2 level 2 version doesn't do that. However, the heightened version still seems to work just fine for that.
The main change is the low level version of the spell can't be used offensively in PF2.
With no clear rules around when or how much people rely on hearing for perception, I am curious how many people actual memorize the 2nd level version of the spell, when they use it, and how GMs interpret it.
I live that fundamentally and conceptually it pairs closely to invisibility, but invisibility as a game effect is so much clearer about what it does. I can’t imagine silence gets chosen with even 10 percent of the regularity of invisibility.
I think I'd just give the affected individual the deafened condition
With no clear rules around when or how much people rely on hearing for perception, I am curious how many people actual memorize the 2nd level version of the spell, when they use it, and how GMs interpret it.
The rules are pretty clear for me : If you are Unnoticed and in Total Concealment (IE can't be seen) if you are under Silence spell then you can Stride without prompting a Perception check else you prompt a Perception check to know if you have been heard when you move even if you are not in view...
The rules are pretty clear for me : If you are Unnoticed and in Total Concealment (IE can't be seen) if you are under Silence spell then you can Stride without prompting a Perception check else you prompt a Perception check to know if you have been heard when you move even if you are not in view...
Do you have a page number to reference this with? Or was this your interpretation of the rules?
This under Perception entry page 448 line 2 : "Every creature has Perception, which works with and is limited by a creature’s senses"...
So if someone can't see you and can't hear you and has no other means to sense you then no perception check...
Unless you never wash yourself or just come back from a sewer then I can prompt a perception check from the smell... :p
what about if your character is sneaking through dim light or fog, or some other situation where vision is reduced but not blocked entirely? Does silence do nothing? Does it give a set boost to stealth checks? It would be nice to have a little more to go on with this spell, especially since invisibility is so specific.
I would say that you would have the effect of Deafened towards detecting the silenced person. -2 Status penalty
But this would really be up to the GM and "what else was going on". I originally used the word "Circumstances", but since this seems to be a Status penalty I have excised it from my sentences.
Deafened
Source Core Rulebook pg. 619
You can’t hear. You automatically critically fail Perception checks that require you to be able to hear. You take a –2 status penalty to Perception checks for initiative and checks that involve sound but also rely on other senses. If you perform an action with the auditory trait, you must succeed at a DC 5 flat check or the action is lost; attempt the check after spending the action but before any effects are applied. You are immune to auditory effects.
I would say that you would have the effect of Deafened towards detecting the silenced person. -2 Status penalty
But this would really be up to the GM and "what else was going on". I originally used the word "Circumstances", but since this seems to be a Status penalty I have excised it from my sentences.
Deafened
Source Core Rulebook pg. 619
You can’t hear. You automatically critically fail Perception checks that require you to be able to hear. You take a –2 status penalty to Perception checks for initiative and checks that involve sound but also rely on other senses. If you perform an action with the auditory trait, you must succeed at a DC 5 flat check or the action is lost; attempt the check after spending the action but before any effects are applied. You are immune to auditory effects.
Oooh nice one... Having to resort to use a spell malus to be "coherent" is a little sad... I'm interested to know, do you often launch Perception check only on sound ?
If yes, what malus or bonus do you give to enemy if someone is moving behind a big wall with "Stride" and with "Stealth" action...But for their defense I have to say that the "Hidden" mechanic has always been one of the most "I try to cheese it" mechanic in D&D since it can really overpower a rogue if you rule one side or under-power them if you rule it the other way... The more complicated it was the less anyone was keen to use it...
1e rules were over-complicated, and really, really subject to interpretation, so much so that I have used third editor rules to do it...
2e rules are a little less complicated rule-wise, letting the GM more "in control" but at the same time more lost in what rules to use...
No rules on hearing, smelling etc. all to the GM to do... Only view really detailed... Mweh... Not a fan.
My table wants consistency, changing rules from one session to another is difficult especially since I've played with them for more than 20 years, being master or player... I know them well... :p
And I know that, for at least on of them, Stealth rule is important because he frequently invest in Stealth and want "his return on investment" ;)
Oooh nice one... Having to resort to use a spell malus to be "coherent" is a little sad... I'm interested to know, do you often launch Perception check only on sound ?
If yes, what malus or bonus do you give to enemy if someone is moving behind a big wall with "Stride" and with "Stealth" action...But for their defense I have to say that the "Hidden" mechanic has always been one of the most "I try to cheese it" mechanic in D&D since it can really overpower a rogue if you rule one side or under-power them if you rule it the other way... The more complicated it was the less anyone was keen to use it...
1e rules were over-complicated, and really, really subject to interpretation, so much so that I have used third editor rules to do it...
2e rules are a little less complicated rule-wise, letting the GM more "in control" but at the same time more lost in what rules to use...No rules on hearing, smelling etc. all to the GM to do... Only view really detailed... Mweh... Not a fan.
My table wants consistency, changing rules from one session to another is difficult especially since I've played with them for more than 20 years, being master or player... I know...
Well, now days I never ask for perception checks <grin> They being secret and all (I actually tend to do a mix of secret and player rolled dice). Everything depends on the situation, environment, the players and the type of game being run. It's for fun, and the kids are new to playing, so I try keep the DC near the targets Stealth DC. Often, I'll ask for a roll and just remember the simple 2E 10,15,20,30,40 dc's.
If someone rolls well, then they get to notice it.As for the wall, it depends on what the situation and an understanding of what the players think is going on. Is it "theatre of the mind"? Or are we on a grid. What did the player say, and what was their intent, and finally what do the rules think about their intent? Do people have any idea that the other party exists?
In the simplest way, I would have the "sneaking" person roll vs DC of the opponents stealth. IF they are close, but not over, I would think about what modifiers there might be, like the +4 Circumstance bonus to Stealth for full cover. Once I have that +4 Circumstance bonus, nothing else positive circumstance is going to help. Do they have a Noisy armor penalty? It doesn't matter if they win by 4 or 9 or loose by 3 or really. How much time do you spend getting it perfect (never perfect) vs moving along the game.
Currently, some of the bad guys are "Blind" because they don't have darkvision and the party does.
For the kids game I tend to do the following
Do your best, look at the rolls, keep it moving and worry more about accuracy when it matters to the plot and Character lives.
Over all, I'm ok with the generalities of the 2e rules, just roll and see where the dice lay.
Other senses. Hearing, Roll stealth while sneaking, if they could not see you (+4 circumstance) but you fail, then they heard you.
Scent. You quickly become noticed (Hidden) in their "scent" range. Other non-scent opponents, they don't notice.
The explanations are a little lacking for each because they use Keywords like Precise and Imprecise, but they are there.
I personally got a better understanding on ALL of this from watching the Basics 4 Gamers series on Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChtQk-wDX5F15f1dYGO5SQQ
Perception and Concealment (Especially Schrodingers goblin)
https://youtu.be/9Xm_1IBdU6A
Stealth
https://youtu.be/CFR-7N_nOS0
Nightfox
|
I’ve found a considerable problem in the text of one of the Pathfinder Society scenarios.
** spoiler omitted **
In that scenario, one of the foes has silence (not the heightened variety) as a tactic in combat against the foes. A big typo given the change to that spell in 2e.
I am running this tonight and found this thread because of that problem. I'm going to tag one of the minions with the heightened version of the spell and have it carry the radius to whichever spellcaster is the primary threat (of which there will probably be only one in this group). I don't think it's a huge stretch to allow the boss to do this, given that it's what was intended in the first place. It's either that or ad hoc a Offensive Feature that allows the boss to use silence as an offensive spell at range, which seems what the writer intended.
I feel like the low level version exists almost entirely in the interest of keeping Silence as a 2nd level spell that exists.
The heightened version is the extremely useful version we know and love.
"In the spell area, no one can hear you scream."
"Also you're a wizard so its additionally extremely inconvenient and you're pretty much doomed."
No rules on hearing, smelling etc. all to the GM to do... Only view really detailed... Mweh... Not a fan.
There are rules for these senses. Hearing is an Imprecise Sense, so you automatically pinpoint anything not sneaky that is making sound. Silence is the only way for an invisible creature to be Undetected while fighting without having to roll tons of Stealth checks.