|
Does the Conceal Spell feat trigger reactions such as attack of opportunity?
I was in a combat situation where I was surrounded on almost all sides with either allies or Enemies with Attack of Opportunity. I didn't really have options to step away and didn't want to provoke from multiple enemies by moving. I would like to cast either Invisibility or a Touch spell. What happens if I use Conceal Spell and cast Either Invisibility or Shocking grasp. Assume I succeed on all enemies with my Stealth Check and Bluff Check.
I would think yes because Conceal Spell has the manipulate trait and Attack of Opportunity's trigger includes actions with said trait.
And, in a way, I think that makes sense. All Conceal Spell does is to conceal your spell's hand motions, verbal utterings, etc. as non-spellcasting movements and doesn't entirely remove them (which would be the domain of metamagic like silent spell/still spell).
Conceal spell is for hiding that your movements are a spell, not for not making movements. I dont see why anyone would expect it to avoid a Reactiom that isn't specifically a reaction to spells. When drawing a weapon provokes that reaction, it would be weird if disguising a spell as nonmagical gestures didn't.
Conceal spell is for hiding that your movements are a spell, not for not making movements. I dont see why anyone would expect it to avoid a Reactiom that isn't specifically a reaction to spells. When drawing a weapon provokes that reaction, it would be weird if disguising a spell as nonmagical gestures didn't.
That is a very good point. And makes me think of another interaction to look at instead.
How about Mage Hunter. Would/should Conceal Spell successfully prevent a Superstition Instinct Barbarian with Mage Hunter from attacking them in reaction to their spellcasting?
|
Conceal spell is for hiding that your movements are a spell, not for not making movements. I dont see why anyone would expect it to avoid a Reactiom that isn't specifically a reaction to spells. When drawing a weapon provokes that reaction, it would be weird if disguising a spell as nonmagical gestures didn't.That is a very good point. And makes me think of another interaction to look at instead.
How about Mage Hunter. Would/should Conceal Spell successfully prevent a Superstition Instinct Barbarian with Mage Hunter from attacking them in reaction to their spellcasting?
I would rule so yes. You took specific actions to confound their trigger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd agree. If a creature is unable to perceive that the Trigger of its Reaction is happening, and the Reaction in question is a conscious action they take in response, not allowing them to use the Reaction is a pretty solid ruling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RAW neither Conceal Spell nor Silent Spell remove the Manipulate trait from spells, and Attack of Opportunity doesn't actually require you to see them cast. Therefore, even if you're using Invisibility or Greater Invisibility and Silent Spell you can still get clocked.
Which is dumb, but there it is.
How is it dumb? It can only happen in combat (AoO doesn't work outside of that) and invis only makes you undetected when you are hiding (or when an effect says, e.g. invisibility).
Casting a spell breaks undetected meaning you are hidden instead, and the AoO still has a 50% miss chance. It seems pretty consistent and sensible to me.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
People forget this, but casting spells in Pathfinder makes glowing runes appear around you. Neither invisibility or silent spell would prevent these from giving away your position and signaling you were casting and vulnerable.
Conceal Spell and Melodious Spell do, however. The manipulate trait means they may not prevent AoO on their own but if you couple it with invisibility I think you're good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are two separate things going on here. The first, manifestations and becoming Hidden instead of Undetected. When you're not casting aloud, and not having manifestations appear because of Conceal Spell.
Let's look at why you would become observed.
You become observed as soon as you do anything other than Hide, Sneak, or Step. If you attempt to Strike a creature, the creature remains flat-footed against that attack, and you then become observed. If you do anything else, you become observed just before you act unless the GM determines otherwise. The GM might allow you to perform a particularly unobtrusive action without being noticed, possibly requiring another Stealth check. If you speak or make a deliberate loud noise, you become hidden instead of undetected.
The part I've highlighted is actually important. Using GM discretion in cases like this (not doing anything to make noise, not creating a magic light show anymore, etc) is actually a key part of the rules. The rules of these metamagic feats don't say "combined, these ensure that you can cast and remain Undetected", but if you, as a GM rule that they can't add up to stealthy casting, that is your choice, not a position that written rules forced you into.
The second thing is disguised somatic components triggering Attack of Opportunity. Manifestations don't matter here at all, because it doesn't matter for that reaction whether they know that you're casting a spell. It matters whether they can see you gesturing to do something instead of keeping your guard up. That takes us back to a mirror of the talk about Conceal Spell and Mage Hunter above. There is no general rule about perceiving the Trigger and taking Reactions. But it's pretty reasonable to divine that that has as much to do with some reactions, like a Purple Worm shrugging off a debillitating effect, not really being things where perceiving the world around you is necessary. AoO is a good example of the kind of reaction where requiring the character to have some way of knowing the trigger's been met is a pretty defensible call for a GM, even if it isn't spelled out in a written rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I'd say going to a full RAWful Evil reading of "it doesn't matter if you've got no way to perceive the trigger of AoO" is also a very definite choice, as a GM.
Because you can use Invisibility to become Undetected, then Silent Spell so that they have no possible way of knowing you're casting a spell.
And you get bonked anyway.
Firstly, AoO gives a strike, the restrictions on the strikes targeting are the same as any other strike (they would have to guess at the square). Not relevant in this case outside of a GM ruling, but still worth recognizing.
Secondly, Silent spell only removes the verbal component of spells only and breaks your undetected status anyway, so undetected doesn't matter in this case.
Thirdly, as I said the miss chance still applies so you are far less likely to get bonked than if you weren't invisible.
Fourth, you only get splatted for manipulate actions with AoO. Silent spell only removes the verbal component of casting a spell, it doesn't make you perfectly quite and silence your clothing.
It also says "However, the spell still has visual manifestations, so this doesn’t make the spell any less obvious to someone who sees you casting it."
90%+ of the time it makes perfect sense.
A case for when it won't make sense, is when you are naked, invisible, flying and use conceal spell (This way you couldn't be making any noise while concealing the spell / using somatic components). But let's be real, that is a real edge case scenario that a GM can adjudicate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And a question…
Is there actually a “glowing runes” part of spellcasting that is visible (RAW)? It’s in pictures, yes, but that is neither somatic, verbal, nor material, and Conceal Spell allows for suppressing all manifestations with successful stealth/deception checks.
CRB pg 302: The casting of a spell can range from a simple word of magical might that creates a fleeting effect to a complex process taking minutes or hours to cast and producing a long-term impact. Casting a Spell is a special activity that takes a number of actions defined by the spell. When you Cast a Spell, your spellcasting creates obvious visual manifestations of the gathering magic, although feats such as Conceal Spell and Melodious Spell can help hide such manifestations or otherwise prevent observers from noticing that you are casting.
What about
Portentous Spell
Manipulate,Mental,Metamagic,Oracle,Visual
Source Advanced Player's Guide pg. 81
Your spellcasting is rife with strange lights, esoteric gestures, and other captivating effects that befuddle your foes. If the next action you use is to Cast a Spell, any creature that attempts to use a reaction triggered by your Cast a Spell activity takes a –2 circumstance penalty to attack rolls and skill checks rolled as part of the reaction. In addition, if the spell includes a spell attack roll or requires a saving throw, creatures you hit or that fail their saves are fascinated with you until the start of your next turn.
I mean, AoO triggers on manipulate actions... and the metamagic feat is manipulate.
The scene would be like
*Portentous Spell!*
*The monster delivers an AoO in the oracle face*
*I Cast a spell now! and I dare you try to hit me*
*I couldn't anyway, I used my reaction for this turn*Worst lvl 16 feat ever?
AoO can disrupt the spell if it is used against the spellcasting actions. Using AoO on the Portentous Spell action instead means that the spell cannot be disrupted. Sure the Oracle is still taking a sword to the face, but the spell does still go off.
A smart and knowledgable fighter then has to make a hard decision when fighting against this Oracle: Take the easy AoO against the metamagic and allow the spell to happen, or wait until the actual spellcasting and deal with the -2 penalty to the AoO attack roll.
And all of this is still completely ignoring the second half of the feat where it causes the Fascinated condition.
CRB pg 302: The casting of a spell can range from a simple word of magical might that creates a fleeting effect to a complex process taking minutes or hours to cast and producing a long-term impact. Casting a Spell is a special activity that takes a number of actions defined by the spell. When you Cast a Spell, your spellcasting creates obvious visual manifestations of the gathering magic, although feats such as Conceal Spell and Melodious Spell can help hide such manifestations or otherwise prevent observers from noticing that you are casting.
And a question…
Is there actually a “glowing runes” part of spellcasting that is visible (RAW)?….Thanks, I missed that! So normal casting comes with some obvious “magical things are happening” manifestations (flavour adaptable I suppose) which the Conceal Spell adept learns to subdue/hide.
Still seems niche but I like the feat better now and the role play benefits seem more interesting.
It is the sort of thing that isn't likely to come up in an AP, as they don't try to structure those so one failed bluff check derails the story, and the best spells to use with it are incapacitation and therefore aren't great against on level creatures. But it has mad potential in an urban homegame that's more open ended. Being able to cast Charm or Dominate in a crowd with no one being the wiser can be a really effective social tool, especially if you can target lower level people.