| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it's an innate spell on a creature that is described as being stealthy or deceptive (such as a doppelganger or succubus), I assume there are no components or observable manifestations.
The rest of the time it's whatever the plot demands.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Silent Spell won't do the trick, that doesn't remove the visual manifestations. You need Conceal Spell, which is a feat deeper in even.
There's nothing in the rules saying sneaky-themed creatures can automatically cast sneakier.
I think the history of the current rule is that in PF1 at first there were some seeeeeriously irritating fights with invisible summoner casters that'd just stay invisible and spam the battlefield with summons. Also, there was the mother of all rules arguments about how PF1 spellcraft identified spells. At some point the word came down from on high that spells were really NOT subtle.
Personally I think it might have been better to come up with a "subtle" trait for some spells that indicates this particular spell is not so noticeable during casting. It'd make spells like Ghost Sound actually practical.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's the Cast a Spell activity that causes those manifestations.
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.
Casting innate spells requires the use of the Cast a Spell activity, so they produce those manifestations.
You gain the ability to Cast a Spell and use any spellcasting actions necessary to cast your innate spells; since this magic is innate, you can replace any material component with a somatic component.
It's the Cast a Spell activity that causes those manifestations.
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.
Casting innate spells requires the use of the Cast a Spell activity, so they produce those manifestations.
You gain the ability to Cast a Spell and use any spellcasting actions necessary to cast your innate spells; since this magic is innate, you can replace any material component with a somatic component.
The rule you quoted is titled "Casting Spells" not "Casting Innate Spells".
It's a good thing the Stealth monsters are using innate spells and not spells.
I'd argue that your rule doesn't even apply.
In any case, I refuse to believe that it was the intent of the developers to make monsters that can't possibly perform as described. Wherever RAW may contradict such intent, any GM worth their salt should ignore it.
I think the history of the current rule is that in PF1 at first there were some seeeeeriously irritating fights with invisible summoner casters that'd just stay invisible and spam the battlefield with summons. Also, there was the mother of all rules arguments about how PF1 spellcraft identified spells. At some point the word came down from on high that spells were really NOT subtle.
I was here when the new stealth casting rules were announced. It was utterly shameful how Paizo handled it. The RAW worked one way for years, everyone knew it, then Paizo changed the way the rules worked and then lied saying "that's the way it had always been," even though their new rules completely broke several published monsters and encounters.
Should have just called it what it was: errata. Instead they treated their customers like idiots in the hope of saving face rather than admitting that they had made a mistake in allowing stealth casters to be so powerful.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The rule you quoted is titled "Casting Spells" not "Casting Innate Spells".
There's no separate rule "Casting Innate Spells". Innate Spells use the Cast a Spell activity like everyone else.
It's literally on the same page. Left column talks about innate spells using Cast a Spell and the right column defines how that works.
|
|
In any case, I refuse to believe that it was the intent of the developers to make monsters that can't possibly perform as described.Well, the thing is, nobody explicitly described monsters as able to cast spells silently. At least I haven't seen it. It's just descriptions and essence of spells and monsters' statblocks themselves and obvious stories you could imagine all hint that it should be possible.
Let's look at the Bogey for example: "A bogey typically hunts a single creature at a time, usually a small child or elderly person, methodically stalking and tormenting their prey. Often hiding under a bed, amid a dark attic space, or in a closet left slightly ajar, the bogey delights in the slow, methodical cultivation of fear in its victims." It has ghost sound, message cantrips, fear spells, Stealth +10 and no Invisibility (and even if it had, manifestations aren't invisible with you). So how this 'methodical stalking and tormenting' should look like? A victim hears spellcasting from the attic above and sees magical lights (or even nice ordered magical runes in circles) there every several seconds?
So nobody actually says they cast these spells, but what other things should they do? They can intimidate from bushes, but bushes are searchable :) Unlike creepy voices in your head from a thin air...And yes, Ascalaphus and Gisher are right, there're no exceptions from spellcasting rules for anyone and anything, including innate spells. The only thing innate spells have - they don't need material components.
Yeah I think overall it's good that most spells are obvious. Especially things that have "hard" combat value, like summoning monsters and placing walls on the battlefield and such. Letting an invisible caster do that during combat with impunity is annoying. That should cost "extra" in the monster's budget.
But it might be nice for some spells to have a "subtle" trait. That trait would indicate that the components and manifestations of this spell aren't obvious. Maybe people could still get a Perception check to notice them, but it wouldn't be automatic. And such a spell would count as "particularly unobtrusive" for purposes like the Sneak action.
Good examples for "subtle" spells would be Message, Ghost Sound, and maybe some things like Suggestion. So that you have a decent chance of using a Suggestion of someone who isn't alone without everyone else giving you That Look.
Yes, something akin to a "subtle" trait sounds like it would be a good (and simple) change.
Making monsters make a deception or stealth check to cast spells secretly like they had the silent spell or conceal spell feat seems pretty fair. Making it automatic feels unnecessarily punitive to players.