Clarification on Secret Signs feat and somatic only spells

[Canadian Bakka]

Would the feat Secret Signs allow a spellcaster attempting to cast a spell with somatic components only (regardless of how or why the spell has only somatic components) to hide the fact that they are spellcasting, including hiding the magical manifestations/clues that would normal tell a non-trained observer that the spellcaster is casting a spell?

Secret Signs was written some considerable time (in 2011) before this Paizo FAQ (in 2015), so I am not 100% sure if it would hide the magical manifestations that comes with spellcasting in general or hide the act of attempting to cast a spell with only somatic components that would normally allow characters trained in Spellcraft to identify the spell?

(Under normal circumstances, an observer must be able to hear the verbal components or see the somatic components of a spell in order to be able to use Spellcraft to identity the spell.)

Thank you in advance. :)

Cheers!

CB

[Pizza Lord]

Secret Signs will stop them from detecting that you're casting a spell (obviously if the spell does something they can see that afterwards). If they don't beat your Sleight of Hand with Perception, they can't tell you're casting a spell (without some other ability to do so). And it has to be Somatic only, it can't also be Verbal or have a Material component (unless Silent or Eschewed, respectively).

Anyone who does try to identify a somatic spell you are casting has a –2 penalty to do so, whether they noticed you were casting or not (obviously if they didn't notice you casting they shouldn't get a Spellcraft check), but even in a case where you weren't trying to hide it technically, it would apply to any somatic spell.

Manifestations or whatever that FAQ attempted to implement (even though they state those aren't actually rules or listed anywhere) does not come into play here. The FAQ is intended to indicate a person normally knows a spell "of some kind" is being cast, even if they know nothing of spells. In this case, you are taking a feat that prevents that (for somatic spells only, sometimes... if you beat their Perception).

[Diego Rossi]

FAQ wrote:

Special abilities exist (and more are likely to appear in Ultimate Intrigue) that specifically facilitate a spellcaster using chicanery to misdirect people from those manifestations and allow them to go unnoticed, but they will always provide an onlooker some sort of chance to detect the ruse.

The FAQ says that "special abilities exist" that can hide the spellcasting. That implies that some abilities existed before the FAQ. Secret sign seems to be one of those.

[Azothath]

Canadian Bakka wrote:

Would the feat Secret Signs allow a spellcaster attempting to cast a spell with somatic components only (regardless of how or why the spell has only somatic components) to hide the fact that they are spellcasting, including hiding the magical manifestations/clues that would normal tell a non-trained observer that the spellcaster is casting a spell?

...
CB

a bit convoluted question but the feat description and FAQ(see above post) cover it. Hiding(aka Stealth|Bluff|SlgtHand) vs Perception, so "training" on the observer's part is bypassed (as perception is not "trained only"). It inserts a skill check before the assumed spellcasting manifrustrations cause a "AHA! she is casting!" moment.

That makes identifying a spell statistically harder (2 checks).   Theoretically there are always two checks but usual circumstances make the perception check to see the casting obvious thus GMs naturally skip the check and RAW assumes it is obvious.    Still, the guys with the highest perception are likely to yell, "ATTACK! She is CASTING a SPELL!". 🙄
Perception is a very useful skill so most PCs/NPCs/monsters pump it to near maximum skill ranks.

Commentary
All the methods take considerable investment on behalf of the caster to attempt this charade and honestly it can be done via spells and a good setup far easier and efficiently (using the skill ranks for other things). Secondly the caster causes skill checks (possibly multiple checks) and rule lookups so your GM needs to be prepared for this little timeout/game flow speedbump.
If you are in a Cloak-and-Dagger campaign with a multiclassed caster it can be a good thematic in-style option.

[Canadian Bakka]

Azothath wrote:

Canadian Bakka wrote:

Would the feat Secret Signs allow a spellcaster attempting to cast a spell with somatic components only (regardless of how or why the spell has only somatic components) to hide the fact that they are spellcasting, including hiding the magical manifestations/clues that would normal tell a non-trained observer that the spellcaster is casting a spell?

...
CB

a bit convoluted question but the feat description and FAQ(see above post) cover it. Hiding(aka Stealth|Bluff|SlgtHand) vs Perception, so "training" on the observer's part is bypassed (as perception is not "trained only"). It inserts a skill check before the assumed spellcasting manifrustrations cause a "AHA! she is casting!" moment.

That makes identifying a spell statistically harder (2 checks).    Still, the guys with the highest perception are likely to yell, "ATTACK! She is CASTING a SPELL!". [ooc][/ooc]
Perception is a very useful skill so most PCs/NPCs/monsters pump it to near maximum skill ranks.

Commentary
All the methods take considerable investment on behalf of the caster to attempt this charade and honestly it can be done via spells and a good setup far easier and efficiently (using the skill ranks for other things). Secondly the caster causes skill checks (possibly multiple checks) and rule lookups so your GM needs to be prepared for this little timeout/game flow speedbump.
If you are in a Cloak-and-Dagger campaign with a multiclassed caster it can be a good thematic in-style option.

When I wrote "non-trained observer," I meant to distinguish between a person with no ranks in Spellcraft or other formal, academic understanding of magic (for example, a typical farmer) vs. someone who is trained in Spellcraft and thus have a chance of identifying the spell being cast (for example, another spellcaster). I did not mean the differences between a person who doesn't have ranks in Perception and someone who does have ranks in Perception. :)

Cheers,

CB

[Canadian Bakka]

Thank you kindly to everyone who has replied, your constructive feedback has been helpful. :)

Cheers,

CB