The spellcasting equivalent of hustling some pool?
This sounds more like a role-playing type of thing to do. Which the rules aren't really there to limit you for. Work that out with the GM and the other players on what the game can handle.
Now, if there is some plot mechanic that you are attempting to get as a result, that is a different matter. For example if you are trying to downplay your spellcasting ability in order to not be seen as a threat by the guards that are wanting to confiscate your magical equipment before allowing you into a tavern. Something like that I would call for a Deception check to lie - because that is what you are actually doing: lying about your actual spellcasting abilities.
As a GM I would just handle this with deception checks. The better you are at deception the better you are at hiding your true skills/abilities.
Attack the ground next to them, or the table they're sitting at.
Sure, you can flavor that as what happens, but it's still going to need a deception check or else the observer know you didn't intend to hit them. Which they'll probably think is weird.
Agreed; Deception check for sure.
For a spellcaster that want to pass as something else. What is allowed by the rule to intentionnally act worst than the roll of the dice and the modifier?
Can you be more precise in what you want?
For what I understand there's something as "circumstances bonus/malus" that you can claim RAW.
If you want to have an intentional failure you can ask your GM to :
- Ask for a circumstance malus(Maybe secretly or not depending on how the table manage "in game" and "out game" info)
- Have a minus on your die for certain action permanently "unless you say so" (with a secret wording ?)
- Agree on a sign when you want to automatically fail something with your GM (I think to willingly fail any action is something but I can't remember where I have read it).
If you want this to remain a secret you HAVE to discuss it with your GM.
Edit : Sorry, from a non English first language reader what I read was : "is there a legitimate way to not willingly succeed on a spell roll" ;)
For a spellcaster that want to pass as something else. What is allowed by the rule to intentionnally act worst than the roll of the dice and the modifier?Can you be more precise in what you want?
For what I understand there's something as "circumstances bonus/malus" that you can claim RAW.
If you want to have an intentional failure you can ask your GM to :
- Ask for a circumstance malus(Maybe secretly or not depending on how the table manage "in game" and "out game" info)
- Have a minus on your die for certain action permanently "unless you say so" (with a secret wording ?)
- Agree on a sign when you want to automatically fail something with your GM (I think to willingly fail any action is something but I can't remember where I have read it).
If you want this to remain a secret you HAVE to discuss it with your GM.
Edit : Sorry, from a non English first language reader what I read was : "is there a legitimate way to not willingly succeed on a spell roll" ;)
So in English, malus is a genus of apple. I can't find any other language for it online, other than Latin, where it may have been the root for malice, meaning evil. Is your use of this word intended to mean penalty?
So in English, malus is a genus of apple. I can't find any other language for it online, other than Latin, where it may have been the root for malice, meaning evil. Is your use of this word intended to mean penalty?
Bonus / Malus. It appears to be latin.
Penalty is certainly the more common English word for it though.
There is also the Horadric Malus...
So in English, malus is a genus of apple. I can't find any other language for it online, other than Latin, where it may have been the root for malice, meaning evil. Is your use of this word intended to mean penalty?
Sorry, my bad, a circumstance malus should be the contrary of a circumstance Bonus which in English is a Circumstances Penalty...
Bonus means Plus (+) which is easy to understand in English while minus is the inverse meaning, well, a penalty, but mathematically it means (-)
Sorry for the language ;)
Hope this help to understand what I have tried to convey :)
Because of Covid-19 our games are currently on Roll20 so it would look weird to throw all the roll secretly when the other pc are doing it openly
There really aren't explicit rules for what you are trying to do. It isn't something commonly done - at least not often enough to write specific rules to handle this.
I'm guessing that you are not one of the players trying to pull this on one of the other players. That would be really odd. I am not sure if you are the GM wanting to have a deceptive NPC fooling the party about your NPC's level, or if you are a player wanting to fool one of the NPCs.
In either case, you are going to need to get the GM involved. If you are the GM, that won't be too difficult. If you are not the GM and you don't have the GM on board with what you are doing - I don't think it is going to work.
----------
@Loengrin, I think you are doing fine on the language. There are plenty of english words that have mal- as a prefix for 'bad'. Benefactor / malefactor being the most clear example. I can also think of 'malady', 'malcontent', and 'malformed' though those ones don't have the ben- or bon- prefixed words to pair with them.
I don't think anyone was actually confused by what you wrote.
Because of Covid-19 our games are currently on Roll20 so it would look weird to throw all the roll secretly when the other pc are doing it openly
Well it's the same at a real table, if everybody is rolling out in the open and you are the only one not to that's suspicious too...
In every case you it's difficult to play like this if the peoples around the table don't know how to draw the line between what they know and what their character know... ;)For mage/rogue The sneak attack rules looks like it must be added if you touch and the opponent is flat foot. They may have worded it in a way that it was optionnal because you don't always want to kill the adversary. The magic trickster say 'you can' so it might be optionnal for sneak attack on spell.
From the entry for "Sneak Attack" p281 it seems that you HAVE to add the sneak attack damage if you can, but if you read page 180 the Ruffian entry it says "You can deal sneak attack", implying it's not an obligation (and ever more implying that if you don't say you want to apply them then you don't apply them :p )...
More importantly in the Magical Trickster entry it says "you can add your sneak attack" meaning it's not an obligation... ;)Deception with a high character that is spying will already have it above 30. So only a natural 1 while pc are rolling high can trigger something.
The cantrip is really the big problem. The public roll indicate to the other players that you touch. Others players will suspect something if you say that you have no more spell to throw and those are impacting at full damage.
Yep, same at "real" table where players throw their dice in the open, the only solution to this is either :
- Everyone roll secretly
or
- People accept to draw a line between what they know and what their character knows... ;)
@Loengrin, I think you are doing fine on the language. There are plenty of english words that have mal- as a prefix for 'bad'. Benefactor / malefactor being the most clear example. I can also think of 'malady', 'malcontent', and 'malformed' though those ones don't have the ben- or bon- prefixed words to pair with them.
I don't think anyone was actually confused by what you wrote.
Yes, I was. That's why I asked. He answered. There was no conflict here. Thanks for your unrequested opinion though.