| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 12 Oct 2013 : 23:40:48
Hi guys...
A simple question: Can a spell with no verbal, somatic and material component be identified via spellcraft, during the casting?
|
| 27 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Diffan |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 18:42:33
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Personally, I think that if you are in a campaign that lets itself get bogged down in ANY rule debate, its doomed before it reaches this point. RPGs are not about the Roll, they are about the Role. The "rules" are there as an aid to the DM, not a rail to fence the DM in. Don't lose sight of the forest in looking at the trees boys.
The problem is that the rules are HOW you play the game and interact with the world. Sometimes (probably more than that) it's perfectly fine for the DM to skip, change, or ignore the rules SO LONG as it's for the enjoyment and fun for the table. I removed confirm Critical hit rules on natural 20s in my D&D v3.5 games as well as other minor tweaks and changes that, while not game breaking, made my players happier. Changing or ignoring a rule without some reason why in mid-game (mid-combat even) is really not OK if it negatively effects one of the group.
In this particular example (detecting and countering a presumed invisible spell) the Player had a very specific idea of what he wanted to do and did so in a way that corresponds with the rules. The DM then went past that with rule 0 and basically said "no, it doesn't work". Unless there's some reason why, I could easily see the player getting angry and/or frustrated. It makes his choices and decisions feel minimal or pointless and causes resentment between a player and the DM. Now if the DM went onto describe WHY it was countered (a spell was in effect that could detect magical energies gathering and I rolled extreamly well to decipher the spell being used) then it's just how the dice fall. But to just say "Nah, it's countered" without rhyme or reason instantly causes friction at the table.
So sure, the DM can do whatever he wants but when that is seen to be at the groups detriment then players often leave and the DM has no one left to game with. It's why good rules are important to have so that there is a starting reference to work with. It doesn't mean is MUST be followed 100% of the time but it sure helps keeping everyone on the same page. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 00:51:09
Perhaps I have a penchant for hyperbole. Perhaps :P |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 22:39:35
That‘s a little bit of an exaggeration, I think, TMM. The rules of every RPG are often subject to some interpretation and the ubiquitous catch-all “DM‘s/GM‘s/Referee‘s discretion and judgement“. Players like to use every edge they can get, and as often as not will base their entire character around some potent crunch combination. While I think the DM should always have final say on rules matters, I also (as a DM) welcome questions/discussions about (and changes to!) the rules - otherwise some players will be frustrated while the munchkins gonna munch to much and unbalance/break the game for everybody else. It‘s not that great a hobby when part of the group (DM or player) has fun while another part does not. Bad DMs must often be lonely.
Using Diffan‘s example above, I would explain what I want to accomplish and ask exactly how to do it. Perhaps the DM requires more exacting build choices. Perhaps he‘s simply decided that higher-level wizards automatically trump lesser wizards, perhaps he even made some kind of check with bad (for Diffan) results. If the DM declares it‘s impossible then so be it, hopefully he can be fair and allow Diffan‘s wizard to invest his feats/points in other options which aren‘t perceived as “useless“. Game rules should be completely transparent to all, although not necessarily before encounterschallenges are entirely resolved.
I repeat myself here: PCs and NPCs should always be able to duplicate each others‘ scummy tricks. A heavyhanded DM will eventually be forced to endure heavyhanded players. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 19:04:32
Personally, I think that if you are in a campaign that lets itself get bogged down in ANY rule debate, its doomed before it reaches this point. RPGs are not about the Roll, they are about the Role. The "rules" are there as an aid to the DM, not a rail to fence the DM in. Don't lose sight of the forest in looking at the trees boys. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 18:37:18
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
The simple answers is that the rules do not matter. Anything can be detected or not as per the DM.
Obviously, but one has to start questioning what value a player's choices have when the DM starts enacting Rule 0. Like I said earlier, if I'm playing a Wizard and I have prepared a Still, Silent Fireball and utilize the Eschew Materials feat with the intention of being sneaky and getting a spell off without any one noticing and all of a sudden the Mage across the way instantly counters it despite my character's best efforts, well crap that was a HUGE waste of resources and time. That would definitly get a "WTF?" (and not in a funny, 'this is a crazy game' sorta way).
When this happens, I've experienced some huge debates and arguments because of the rules and DMs going around them to the detriment of the player involved. Usually the player then starts cheating too and it devolves into a crap campaign where people quit. Ie. It's not a fun outcome and for what?
Agreed. Any DM that did that to me... outta there. When the DM is all about himself and not about bringing a good game that rewards ingenuity, I'm not interested in supporting that DM's ego.
Now, if said DM had setup some kind of in-depth plan of layered wardings and that tripped up my casting... that's another thing entirely. But, that's easily provable, because any kind of in-depth warding plan requires it to be written down, and the DM can show you that specific portion if the action becomes questionable enough that the player thinks the DM is out for them. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 13:47:03
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
The simple answers is that the rules do not matter. Anything can be detected or not as per the DM.
Obviously, but one has to start questioning what value a player's choices have when the DM starts enacting Rule 0. Like I said earlier, if I'm playing a Wizard and I have prepared a Still, Silent Fireball and utilize the Eschew Materials feat with the intention of being sneaky and getting a spell off without any one noticing and all of a sudden the Mage across the way instantly counters it despite my character's best efforts, well crap that was a HUGE waste of resources and time. That would definitly get a "WTF?" (and not in a funny, 'this is a crazy game' sorta way).
When this happens, I've experienced some huge debates and arguments because of the rules and DMs going around them to the detriment of the player involved. Usually the player then starts cheating too and it devolves into a crap campaign where people quit. Ie. It's not a fun outcome and for what? |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 02:39:02
The simple answers is that the rules do not matter. Anything can be detected or not as per the DM. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 02:34:15
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
If someone can detect and identify a Still and Silent spell, doesn't that pretty much negate one of the reasons to even have those.feats to begin with? If I chose to prep. a spell and a mage counter spelled it despite my efforts to disguise it, I'd be pretty P.O'ed
Apparently he cant identify the spell being cast, but detecting the casting is in no way more dificult. The PC in question whats to know and have debated, that casting still, silent, material eschewed spells would remove visual manifistation of magic being activated. So no energies forming during casting. BOOM take a save! This however is no where in the rules...
Right, that's the point of preparing a Still, Silent spell. That it's nearly impossible to detect it being cast. I don't assume that magic can be seen as manifesting in front of the caster so it would most likely result in "Hi, My name is.....*BOOM* save for half."
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
and so if you are using dispel magic to counter you automatically know when your enemy starts casting, even though its silent, still and without material...
No, see here is the problem. You cannot, nor should not, be able to counter a silent, still magical spell unless you have some magical way to see these energies gathering prior to your opponent's turn.
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
I for one thinks that during battle, even with reactive counter spell, improved counterspell and being archmage, one would have a hard time detecting an enemy caster "concentrating" a componentless spell.
We must remember that the visual effect happening during casting is only in the fluff text of the spells and are actually not described in the rules...
Agree 100%. Otherwise when you get to X level the feats you've chosen (Eschew, Still, Silent, etc.) are now meaningless when someone can just detect it anyways. Now if the mage has some sort of magic spell prepared and activated that allows the magic to be seen or manifest THEN a check would be allowed, albiet with a HUGE penalty because it's still Still and Silent. OR just say "no" and leave it as that. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 22:32:17
I observe that 3E (3.5E, whatever) suffers from an overabundance of arbitrary and largely unnecessary rule complexities. Well, at least there aren‘t exhaustive stat blocks here, for which I am thankful.
Short answer, like it or not: the DM is always right (even when he isn‘t). Provided his focus is entertainment for all and maintaining gameplay momentum.
Besides, PCs and NPCs can always steal dirty rule-bending exploits from each other. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 17:16:10
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
If someone can detect and identify a Still and Silent spell, doesn't that pretty much negate one of the reasons to even have those.feats to begin with? If I chose to prep. a spell and a mage counter spelled it despite my efforts to disguise it, I'd be pretty P.O'ed
Apparently he cant identify the spell being cast, but detecting the casting is in no way more dificult. The PC in question whats to know and have debated, that casting still, silent, material eschewed spells would remove visual manifistation of magic being activated. So no energies forming during casting. BOOM take a save! This however is no where in the rules... and so if you are using dispel magic to counter you automatically know when your enemy starts casting, even though its silent, still and without material...
I for one thinks that during battle, even with reactive counter spell, improved counterspell and being archmage, one would have a hard time detecting an enemy caster "concentrating" a componentless spell.
We must remember that the visual effect happening during casting is only in the fluff text of the spells and are actually not described in the rules...
No, that idea of the effects of a spell being removed, I would have a problem with. Silent and still do not remove the visual or sonic effects from a spell, only their need by the caster. There's another feat for doing that kind of thing which would allow you to modify such, and in pathfinder there's a feat that would allow you to hide such. However, none of that has to do with counterspelling... that's just recognizing the effect afterwards, so that you might know "hey, I might not want to hit that guy with my sword... or use spells below X level... or whatever". So, if you cast a silent, still spell that surrounds you with flames... the flames still appear.... or if it puts a blue glowing shield around you... that still appears.
|
| Demzer |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 10:30:03
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
I want to point out that this was about the identification of such spells only. But yes... this again! But I'm fairly sure that a conclusion has been reached.
Oh well, i think i covered that in my posts in the other thread but let's recap:
- Detect Magic and Arcane Sight just tell you something is magical and let you identify the school of magic involved with a Spellcraft check, this doesn't give any help identifying a specific spell cast silent+still+eschewed, this means the only way open here is Dispel Magic (Greater) counterspelling or expending your highest level spell of the same school in the hope it's higher level than the one being cast;
- Greater Arcane Sight tells you which spells are related to the auras you are seeing, so there's not much to say here, identification is automatic;
- Battlemagic Perception (the one from Heroes of Battle) lets the caster automatically indentify the spell (with a Spellcraft check, but nothing especially difficult about that) and counterspell on the fly, so it's another clear winner;
- Analyze Dweomer can be used to work just like Greater Arcane Sight (it identifies the spells without issues and checks) but with two big differences: it allows a will saving throw and you have to be using that to specifically analyze the "offending" character, meanng you're already expecting trouble from that arcane-caster (just like all the other spells, but this requires you to use it in the same round as the spell is cast but before the enemy, meaning something like 1) cast Analyze Dweomer prior to encounter, 2) focus each round on the wizard/sorcerer and 3) win initiative to ready an action while the others are just 1) cast prior to the encounter and wait);
There may be other spells with similar effects, these are just the ones that jumped to my mind as their specific purpose is to identify and analyze spell auras: that's pretty much the only thing that remains when a spell is being cast silent, still and without material components.
One partially related note: maybe you can convince your friend to visit these halls (as a guest, but registering doesn't hurt anyone) so he/she can see the arguments and counterarguments we are making and judge by his/herself what to do.
Hope this helps. |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 09:55:59
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
Uh-oh ... this again?
Step 1: go to the other thread about this
Step 2: re-read my posts on usefull spells that enable people to see the "fluff" of magical auras
Step 3: ???
Step 4: profit?
I want to point out that this was about the identification of such spells only. But yes... this again! But I'm fairly sure that a conclusion has been reached. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 09:32:02
Uh-oh ... this again?
Step 1: go to the other thread about this
Step 2: re-read my posts on usefull spells that enable people to see the "fluff" of magical auras
Step 3: ???
Step 4: profit? |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 08:12:40
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
If someone can detect and identify a Still and Silent spell, doesn't that pretty much negate one of the reasons to even have those.feats to begin with? If I chose to prep. a spell and a mage counter spelled it despite my efforts to disguise it, I'd be pretty P.O'ed
Apparently he cant identify the spell being cast, but detecting the casting is in no way more dificult. The PC in question whats to know and have debated, that casting still, silent, material eschewed spells would remove visual manifistation of magic being activated. So no energies forming during casting. BOOM take a save! This however is no where in the rules... and so if you are using dispel magic to counter you automatically know when your enemy starts casting, even though its silent, still and without material...
I for one thinks that during battle, even with reactive counter spell, improved counterspell and being archmage, one would have a hard time detecting an enemy caster "concentrating" a componentless spell.
We must remember that the visual effect happening during casting is only in the fluff text of the spells and are actually not described in the rules... |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 03:47:15
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
If someone can detect and identify a Still and Silent spell, doesn't that pretty much negate one of the reasons to even have those.feats to begin with? If I chose to prep. a spell and a mage counter spelled it despite my efforts to disguise it, I'd be pretty P.O'ed
Well there is that, however not all foes of a magic user is a magic user, still and silence spell can surprise fighter ir others even if they in the past have seen/heard a spell being cast. The silent person can appear not to be a danger, more so if not moving in any hostile way.
What confuses me more though is it appears Eschew Materials is not metamagic though is only a feat to allow a special way to cast spells. *shrugs* |
| Diffan |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 02:50:14
If someone can detect and identify a Still and Silent spell, doesn't that pretty much negate one of the reasons to even have those.feats to begin with? If I chose to prep. a spell and a mage counter spelled it despite my efforts to disguise it, I'd be pretty P.O'ed |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 00:57:13
I don't know what your player is trying to do, but I feel he's right if he's saying that he's silencing, stilling, and removing the need for components in order to get around someone possibly counterspelling his spell. IF you're worried about this breaking your game somehow, don't ever forget the versatility of contingent magics. For every build in this game, there's always a build that will counter it. Some folk may use very simple contingencies such as "dispel magic" on any spell targeting them that they themselves didn't cast... or if a specific effect comes into play, etc.... Effectively, you've just setup a counterspell via contingent magic. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 15 Oct 2013 : 00:48:38
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Well I am more conflicted. From SRD 3.5 This site: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#counterspells
quote:
How Counterspells Work
To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of the counterspell. You do this by choosing the ready action. In doing so, you elect to wait to complete your action until your opponent tries to cast a spell. (You may still move your speed, since ready is a standard action.)
If the target of your counterspell tries to cast a spell, make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell’s level). This check is a free action. If the check succeeds, you correctly identify the opponent’s spell and can attempt to counter it. If the check fails, you can’t do either of these things.
To complete the action, you must then cast the correct spell. As a general rule, a spell can only counter itself. If you are able to cast the same spell and you have it prepared (if you prepare spells), you cast it, altering it slightly to create a counterspell effect. If the target is within range, both spells automatically negate each other with no other results.
Counterspelling Metamagic Spells
Metamagic feats are not taken into account when determining whether a spell can be countered
Specific Exceptions
Some spells specifically counter each other, especially when they have diametrically opposed effects.
Dispel Magic as a Counterspell
You can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, and you don’t need to identify the spell he or she is casting. However, dispel magic doesn’t always work as a counterspell.
In part you need to have readied an action to counter a spell, if not ready clearly can not act.
To try to counter is a free action, so no time is required if a creature has readied that a spell might be cast.
The "Metamagic feats are not taken into account when determining whether a spell can be countered" would indicate that Eschew Materials is not metamagic, however Silent Spell and Still Spell are.
If this SRD is entered correctly, then any spell cast with Silent Spell and Still Spell feats can be Counterspelled, however use of only Eschew Materials feat can not be conterspelled.
You are reading too much into that statement. Basically, they put that statement in so that people who cast a maximized fireball can still be counterspelled by someone just using a fireball spell (i.e. you don't take into effect the maximized metamagic add on the fireball). Otherwise people would be fighting over that "no, I had a maximized fireball and you only counterspelled a REGULAR fireball".
Also, there's certain feats and or class abilities that make counterspelling not require a readied action. Specifically the reactive counterspell feat from PGtF (which works well with the archmage classes "mastery of counterspelling" high arcana and improved counterspell feat from PH, especially with someone who is a theurge and has spells to spare). |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 14 Oct 2013 : 03:07:41
Well I am more conflicted. From SRD 3.5 This site: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#counterspells
quote:
How Counterspells Work
To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of the counterspell. You do this by choosing the ready action. In doing so, you elect to wait to complete your action until your opponent tries to cast a spell. (You may still move your speed, since ready is a standard action.)
If the target of your counterspell tries to cast a spell, make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell’s level). This check is a free action. If the check succeeds, you correctly identify the opponent’s spell and can attempt to counter it. If the check fails, you can’t do either of these things.
To complete the action, you must then cast the correct spell. As a general rule, a spell can only counter itself. If you are able to cast the same spell and you have it prepared (if you prepare spells), you cast it, altering it slightly to create a counterspell effect. If the target is within range, both spells automatically negate each other with no other results.
Counterspelling Metamagic Spells
Metamagic feats are not taken into account when determining whether a spell can be countered
Specific Exceptions
Some spells specifically counter each other, especially when they have diametrically opposed effects.
Dispel Magic as a Counterspell
You can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, and you don’t need to identify the spell he or she is casting. However, dispel magic doesn’t always work as a counterspell.
In part you need to have readied an action to counter a spell, if not ready clearly can not act.
To try to counter is a free action, so no time is required if a creature has readied that a spell might be cast.
The "Metamagic feats are not taken into account when determining whether a spell can be countered" would indicate that Eschew Materials is not metamagic, however Silent Spell and Still Spell are.
If this SRD is entered correctly, then any spell cast with Silent Spell and Still Spell feats can be Counterspelled, however use of only Eschew Materials feat can not be conterspelled. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 14 Oct 2013 : 02:06:24
Ah, now that you reveal why you want to know, I feel that that adds relevance. So, you're wondering if someone had a silent, stilled, with no material components spell being case AND there's another person attempting to use spellcraft to counterspell it. In this instance, I'd say that the person attempting to use spellcraft could NOT identify the spell prior to its release. However, I'd say that after the spell is cast that the person could use spellcraft (with penalties based on situation) to identify the effects (oh, that blue sphere is spell X or wow, the wind stopped like there's an invisible wall blocking it).
After all, if someone is going to spend all the extra effort to silent, still, and no material component a piece of magic... they should get something for the effort. Do I believe that this might open someone up to some interesting issues? Yes, but that's what metamagics are about.... wizards pushing the envelope. |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 13 Oct 2013 : 19:11:48
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Tome and Blood was 3.0, wasn't it? Simply go with the newer source, particularly ones that apply to 3.5 instead of 3.0.
Yes well that was my thought also, but my friend wont settle for that. He simply say that since the 3.0 PHB wording of the spellcraft skill is the same in 3.5 that the Tome and Blood wording should count... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Oct 2013 : 18:17:10
Tome and Blood was 3.0, wasn't it? Simply go with the newer source, particularly ones that apply to 3.5 instead of 3.0. |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 13 Oct 2013 : 17:25:11
Indeed we did sort of cover this subject last week, but I still have a very heated discussion with a friend of mine.
One the one side we have players hand book that says:
Identify a spell being cast. (You must see or hear the spell’s verbal or somatic components.) No action required. No retry.
This to me is quite clear. Further this following page offers insight in th matter ca. 2/3 down: More Magical Oddities (Part One)By Skip Williamshttp://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050524a, which says:
The rules don't come right out and say so, but since you must see a somatic (or material) component or hear a verbal component to identify any spell as it is being cast, you cannot identify a spell that doesn't have any verbal, somatic, or material components. An example of this is a silent and stilled spell that doesn't have a material component
And lastly we have the FAQ 3.5 document that says: For normal counterspelling, the Spellcraft check requires identification of verbal or somatic components. If those are missing, you cannot pass the Spellcraft check, so you cannot counter that spell.
Its all at this point crystal clear o me, thatis the spell in question has no somatic or verbal component it can not be identified. At least not by the spellcraft skill.
On the other hand we have Tome and Blood, that says the following on page 19:
You can use Spellcraft to identify a spell even if the spell has no verbal, somatic, or material component — there’s no mistaking the concentration magic requires. However, you still must be able to see or hear the spellcaster." "For each of these elements you cannot discern, the DC increases by +2. For example, if a foe casts a still and silent spell, your Spellcraft check DC increases by +4."
So here we have the problem. As I read it, three source says no, one says yes.
What to do? |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 13 Oct 2013 : 14:49:10
I agree with Dalor. It may be identifiable by parameters seen and/or felt by other senses during casting (for instance, maybe it gives off a certain smell, a certain noise, causes a flash of light, makes those attuned to the weave feel a certain metaphysical rush, etc....) that would be specific to a certain spell and may give some prior split second warning. I'd make the DC MUCH higher though, and the DC would depend on the spell (i.e. an energy blast more likely to be discerned than say a spell that provides an intelligence bonus to the caster). |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 13 Oct 2013 : 03:33:17
Yup...but this time it is more sly.  |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Oct 2013 : 03:29:03
Didn't we just discuss this a week or two ago?
|
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 13 Oct 2013 : 00:53:13
By manifestation I would say...but I would assign a much higher DC using 3.5 to identify it this way. |
|
|
