Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Again. You have not covered the basics of subtle. Perceptable Effect. Prove that Hex is not Perceptable when it's physically or mentally hindering a target. This is your bar. Get over it or it doesn't matter how much you carry on it's not working like this. You are never showing that Hex is anywhere even close to detect thoughts at all. Slow is a detectable effect and is not subtle. it actively hinders the enemy in some way yet it has little outward visual signs of it taking place to general outsiders and does not deal any damage at all what so ever.
Hex is so not subtle that it actually reacts to any combat blows jarring it's target to automatically cause damage as well when that happens automatically. This is not subtle in any way. This is basically in some ways that lightning. Just because your not actively hitting them does not change this fact either or the spell as a whole.
Even if your DM decides they want it to be different that is a home brew for your table specifically but not how it works for those without that home brew. your fine to do that home brew. I'm not saying you can't. What I am saying is without that home brew it doesn't work that way.
You have to see the target and you simultaneously make sound, active movement and have to hold a material component. Saying you can use it to Hex a shopkeeper at BEST is a stealth check at disadvantage to not be seen. Again- you’ve got a highly permissive DM if you are allowed to engage in such shenanigans. Clearly the intent of the ability curse is to hinder enemy restrain/grapple checks and dispel magi/counterspell checks.
You wanna use it on a shopkeeper? Get some meta magic and subtle spell.
I'd totally allow it, given the shopkeeper was distracted somehow. It is absolutely a subtle effect as it only activates in certain discrete events. If those events don't happen right away, there is no RAW that states that hex is noticeable. Regardless, the rules around this are vague enough that definitively dismissing it as homebrew is not really appropriate.
Not knowing you're hexed/cursed until you've suffered through several unlucky mishaps is a common fantasy trope that would be fun to play out in D&D. Warlock spell slots aren't cheap, so there's a significant cost here and it totally feels like one of the ways a warlock would use magic outside of combat.
I'd totally allow it, given the shopkeeper was distracted somehow. It is absolutely a subtle effect as it only activates in certain discrete events. If those events don't happen right away, there is no RAW that states that hex is noticeable. Regardless, the rules around this are vague enough that definitively dismissing it as homebrew is not really appropriate.
Not knowing you're hexed/cursed until you've suffered through several unlucky mishaps is a common fantasy trope that would be fun to play out in D&D. Warlock spell slots aren't cheap, so there's a significant cost here and it totally feels like one of the ways a warlock would use magic outside of combat.
Here's the problem. There is nothing that is saying it isn't noticable except when people are predisposed to wanting it to not be noticable. And there is nothing discrete about combat nor should it be classified as a discrete event. So even with the "vagueness" as you see it of the rules. Dismissing it as a homebrew decision is entirely appropriate because that is what it is.
Not Knowing your Hexed or Cursed is very different from the Hex spell that we have in 5e that we are discussing. That trope is Based entirely around things more along the lines of Geas and Bestow Curse (though these aren't entirely a fitting anology) instead which do not necessarily debilitate the one that is affected by them right away and when it finally does there may not be anything around to give them suspicion of a source or to think there is any reasonable foul play in action so it takes time and various circumstances to reach that conclusion. This is very different from the Hex spell we are talking about.
Also that significant cost your talking about is compensated for. Both in the automatic upcasting of spells that use those slots and the ease with which the slots return since they are gotten back by a short rest, and by other features and abilities of the Warlock class in general as a function including a number of spells at their disposal that don't actually take their spell slots to cast even when their spell slots are used up. So To some Extent. Warlock Spells are cheap. They just aren't endlessly reusable in any one given small chunk of time.
Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Again. You have not covered the basics of subtle. Perceptable Effect. Prove that Hex is not Perceptable when it's physically or mentally hindering a target.
You have to see the target and you simultaneously make sound, active movement and have to hold a material component. Saying you can use it to Hex a shopkeeper at BEST is a stealth check at disadvantage to not be seen. Again- you’ve got a highly permissive DM if you are allowed to engage in such shenanigans. Clearly the intent of the ability curse is to hinder enemy restrain/grapple checks and dispel magi/counterspell checks.
You wanna use it on a shopkeeper? Get some meta magic and subtle spell.
Casting the spell is not subtle, the effect is. To get it off you need someone to distract him or maybe its a outdoor market and you can cast it at 60 feet away. I am not a big proponent of this as it seems a silly use of a spell when you likely only have 2. But some people on the boards see to love it.
Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Again. You have not covered the basics of subtle. Perceptable Effect. Prove that Hex is not Perceptable when it's physically or mentally hindering a target.
Prove its not.
Hey keep home brewing shit.
I have given proof for my side of the debate and debunked the one time you provided any actual proof for yours. The issue here is that you can't prove that it is and it's your job to prove that your way of looking at it is actually viable. Demanding me to prove otherwise when I already am is not an argument. it's a childish denial.
Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Again. You have not covered the basics of subtle. Perceptable Effect. Prove that Hex is not Perceptable when it's physically or mentally hindering a target.
Prove its not.
Hey keep home brewing shit.
I have given proof for my side of the debate and debunked the one time you provided any actual proof for yours. The issue here is that you can't prove that it is and it's your job to prove that your way of looking at it is actually viable. Demanding me to prove otherwise when I already am is not an argument. it's a childish denial.
You have provided no proof at all. You just assert your opinion as fact.
Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Again. You have not covered the basics of subtle. Perceptable Effect. Prove that Hex is not Perceptable when it's physically or mentally hindering a target.
Prove its not.
Hey keep home brewing shit.
I have given proof for my side of the debate and debunked the one time you provided any actual proof for yours. The issue here is that you can't prove that it is and it's your job to prove that your way of looking at it is actually viable. Demanding me to prove otherwise when I already am is not an argument. it's a childish denial.
You have provided no proof at all. You just assert your opinion as fact.
No. You belittle my supporting statements (i.e. proof) because you don't like that they counter your opinion statements. Your only actual attempt of proof was to bring up a single rule without actually providing any supporting statements why that rule actually works in the way that you want it to, or even examples of other things that would support it working the same way. While I've both provided examples of things that should work the same way that you want it to but don't (like the charm spell) and ways that it does not work the way you want it to by other spells and details about the spell itself that speak against your attempted usage of it.
Providing all of these things to support my statements is proof.
Simply going "it doesn't work that way if the GM does not say it works that way and it doesn't matter if it actively hinders the target because the spell doesn't say it is!" Is what is actually providing no Proof.
Well I hate to say this but there is a great big piece of proof why the spell not saying it does is not actually supporting proof for a spell being Subtle. Most spells don't say that they are. Not Lightning Bolt, Not Slow, and Not even Detect Thoughts or Detect Magic, are subtle for the matter of discerning spells by sayin in their description that they are in any way subtle or not subtle. We only know that they are or are not because of the General rule outside of every single spell that says that they beither are because of the way they function without being Visibly flashy and that they do not actually hinder others in their ongoing affects, Or that they are not because they either are very flashy or in some way actually hinder the target affected by the spell.
Any Shop Keeper or any other NPC or PC running around is going to know when they suddenly don't feel right. There is no way around that. Hex is basically a magical spell that suddenly does not make them feel right. This is a perceivable affect on them. Just like They are going to know that their body is suddenly feeling sluggish and not moving the way they want it to if you cast slow on them. They may not know why that this is happening or that it's the Hex spell or the Slow Spell. But they are going to know these things are happening to them just in the same way that you would.
Things that they would not perceive is that your detecting things like magic on them, Changing their visible appearance through illusions unless they are looking in a mirror. The Wall of Force in the Room that they didn't see cast and are not touching. Or even the Invisible Mage Hand of the Arcane Trickster picking their pocket through a sleight of hand roll that they did not beat out with their own perception though in the case of that invisible hand. Though they may still see that object that was taken, such as their coin purse or healing potion, floating around the room on it's own with nothing seeming to be holding it afterward when it comes to that last one.
Charm by it's very nature is not a hinderence. Charm spells in their basic functionality are almost entirely based around the idea of making another creature go "hey I like you and we could be friends and I want to help you out or make you a deal." There is nothing about this that stands out. It can't cause them any harm or even any indirect harm from the spell itself, though it may cause them indirect harm through a third party harming them as they try to help you. But then it is called out as being Noticable after the spell ends in most cases as a general rule anyway.
Hex is not like Charm. Hex in several ways is the opposite of charm and is directly causing their body or mind to not work right in some way and that not working right can actually cause them physical harm. This is represented by them not being able to do tasks as well suddenly when the spell targets them and by the 1d6 damage die. OTHER people in the room might not know that they are hexed or suddenly not feeling right because it doesn't affect them so it can be considered subtle as far as other customers or perhaps the Merchants guard standing in the room is conconcerned (assuming you hide your spell casting in the first place) but that's as subtle as it gets and that is other People not hindered and affected by the spell Like the Shop Keeper that is being affected by the spell. Even the Invocations of Hex that the warlock can put on it aren't subtle by either lashing out at the people around the one that you've hexed or by giving you the power to teleport to the hexed target at 30' range. This is just another indicator of the lack of subtlety that Hex has on it's target.
Another Example of a non-subtle spell on the person that it's affecting like Slow and like Hex is Feeblemind. Feeblemind hinders a target and that person that is affected by it is going to know they are not right. But it hinders them so much and in such specific ways that they are not going to be able process what not feeling right means to any real extent or just how they don't feel right or even be able to express that they don't feel right or that it caused them pain as it shattered their mind to hinder them. But Feeblemind is also far more potent than the piddly level 1 spell Hex. Hex wishes it grows up some day to be like Feeblemind because Feeblemind is in several ways the ultimate version of Hex because it is one of the most powerful curses that PC's can use magic to inflict on another person in 5e.
Or we can just plain go with real world examples for Proof that Hex is not subtle. Every single one of us has had moments in our actual lives where we go. "I'm just not suddenly feeling right. I don't know what's wrong with me but I feel like I might be getting sick or something. What did I get into or what did I eat?" And other things like that. The exception with us feeling this way however is that we do not live in a world where magic actually exists and it is known and in some ways feared by non-magic users that people will do things like this too them So that when these feelings over come them right in the middle of dealing with a bunch of strangers that the reason they are suddenly feeling that way may actually be the strangers themselves. Whether They assume your group poisoned them. Cast a spell on them somehow that they did or didn't notice or did it to them in some other way such as through some magical item or some ally of yours lurking where the Shop Keeper cannot see them.
None of this is just opinion. This is all Proof through logical conclusion or extrapolation of the rules as they stand without trying to bias them to a particular end result.
My opinion is Hex is not a subtle spell to cast, it requires vocal somantic and material components which are pretty hard to hide in a small shop. Sure you can try to distract the shopkeeper with another party member but chances are the shopkeeper has an employee or guards to help keep an eye on possible thieves when a group of people enter their shop together. The open market situation is more plausible, however you will still need to be out of sight of most passerbys while still having line of sight to your target. This may be difficult to do if the market is even remotely busy.
As for the argument that the target won't know whether the spell has a negative or positive effect, I will ask you this: if your character encounters somebody you've never seen before or maybe somebody you barely know and you see that person cast a spell at you without your permission or telling you what they are about to cast. Will you treat that person as hostile?
The DM that Homebrews the use of Hex in this manner is a horrible DM.
I have played a ton of Warlocks (my favourite class), and as a DM throw them at my players.
So:
1. The act of casting Hex is no more subtle than the act of casting any other spell with VSM components. Now, moving the Hex to another target after the 1st target is dead, there is no RAW stating that is anything other than a purely mental act by the Warlock, and therefore not something that can be noticed.
2. Killing some small animal at the beginning of the day to fire up Hex is hugely evil, but if the DM allows Homebrew, they probably allow this as well.
3. A shopkeeper seeing someone casting a spell on them will certainly be infuriated and highly suspicious of that char. But if the spell was being moved only, as opposed to being initially cast, the shopkeeper would have zero knowledge anything was wrong. Now, if and when they start regularly failing Ability Checks for the particular Ability that was targeted, yeah, something might be figured out then. But that is DM Fiat on what would be the threshold. If the Shopkeeper was Hexed and the Strength ability targeted, and the Shopkeeper spent the day only doing the month end books, he would have no knowledge of being Hexed.
4. Now, mechanically speaking Hex loses its utility the higher the level of the Warlock. Even a Warlock focusing on EB will have better uses for Concentration at higher levels. Spirit Shroud might be superior to Hex in short range blaster fights, and something like Shadow of Moil is superior for all kinds of scenarios.
5. If a Hexblade Warlock, the Action Economy of Bonus Actions becomes a serious problem. Hexblade's Curse and Hex compete for that Bonus Action.
The DM that Homebrews the use of Hex in this manner is a horrible DM.
I have played a ton of Warlocks (my favourite class), and as a DM throw them at my players.
So:
1. The act of casting Hex is no more subtle than the act of casting any other spell with VSM components. Now, moving the Hex to another target after the 1st target is dead, there is no RAW stating that is anything other than a purely mental act by the Warlock, and therefore not something that can be noticed.
2. Killing some small animal at the beginning of the day to fire up Hex is hugely evil, but if the DM allows Homebrew, they probably allow this as well.
3. A shopkeeper seeing someone casting a spell on them will certainly be infuriated and highly suspicious of that char. But if the spell was being moved only, as opposed to being initially cast, the shopkeeper would have zero knowledge anything was wrong. Now, if and when they start regularly failing Ability Checks for the particular Ability that was targeted, yeah, something might be figured out then. But that is DM Fiat on what would be the threshold. If the Shopkeeper was Hexed and the Strength ability targeted, and the Shopkeeper spent the day only doing the month end books, he would have no knowledge of being Hexed.
4. Now, mechanically speaking Hex loses its utility the higher the level of the Warlock. Even a Warlock focusing on EB will have better uses for Concentration at higher levels. Spirit Shroud might be superior to Hex in short range blaster fights, and something like Shadow of Moil is superior for all kinds of scenarios.
5. If a Hexblade Warlock, the Action Economy of Bonus Actions becomes a serious problem. Hexblade's Curse and Hex compete for that Bonus Action.
The indicator that it might be a bit more than simple mental effort to move Hex could be in the fact that it requires a bonus action to do just as casting the spell initially already is and it cannot be done in the same turn that the enemy that was under it's effects drops to 0 even if you still have your bonus action available when they do so. while there is no hard and fast rule there is just as much reason for a DM to decide it takes some kind of verbal or somatic piece to reposition it and the decision either way would be made by the DM at the table it is occuring at if it did come up for some reason.
As for 3. All of this is your opinion and you are giving no actual basis to support them. Just like has already been done in this thread. Your making a personal judgement call that they would not feel weaker being affected by it just because they are doing what you perceive as less strenuous tasks and just how much physical exertion and heavy lifting might be involved in that shop keepers afternoon of book keeping.
The DM that Homebrews the use of Hex in this manner is a horrible DM.
I have played a ton of Warlocks (my favourite class), and as a DM throw them at my players.
So:
1. The act of casting Hex is no more subtle than the act of casting any other spell with VSM components. Now, moving the Hex to another target after the 1st target is dead, there is no RAW stating that is anything other than a purely mental act by the Warlock, and therefore not something that can be noticed.
2. Killing some small animal at the beginning of the day to fire up Hex is hugely evil, but if the DM allows Homebrew, they probably allow this as well.
3. A shopkeeper seeing someone casting a spell on them will certainly be infuriated and highly suspicious of that char. But if the spell was being moved only, as opposed to being initially cast, the shopkeeper would have zero knowledge anything was wrong. Now, if and when they start regularly failing Ability Checks for the particular Ability that was targeted, yeah, something might be figured out then. But that is DM Fiat on what would be the threshold. If the Shopkeeper was Hexed and the Strength ability targeted, and the Shopkeeper spent the day only doing the month end books, he would have no knowledge of being Hexed.
4. Now, mechanically speaking Hex loses its utility the higher the level of the Warlock. Even a Warlock focusing on EB will have better uses for Concentration at higher levels. Spirit Shroud might be superior to Hex in short range blaster fights, and something like Shadow of Moil is superior for all kinds of scenarios.
5. If a Hexblade Warlock, the Action Economy of Bonus Actions becomes a serious problem. Hexblade's Curse and Hex compete for that Bonus Action.
The indicator that it might be a bit more than simple mental effort to move Hex could be in the fact that it requires a bonus action to do just as casting the spell initially already is and it cannot be done in the same turn that the enemy that was under it's effects drops to 0 even if you still have your bonus action available when they do so. while there is no hard and fast rule there is just as much reason for a DM to decide it takes some kind of verbal or somatic piece to reposition it and the decision either way would be made by the DM at the table it is occuring at if it did come up for some reason.
As for 3. All of this is your opinion and you are giving no actual basis to support them. Just like has already been done in this thread. Your making a personal judgement call that they would not feel weaker being affected by it just because they are doing what you perceive as less strenuous tasks and just how much physical exertion and heavy lifting might be involved in that shop keepers afternoon of book keeping.
You show me in RAW in source books or Errata or tweets by a lead designer to back up your statements. Take your time..I will wait.
The DM that Homebrews the use of Hex in this manner is a horrible DM.
I have played a ton of Warlocks (my favourite class), and as a DM throw them at my players.
So:
1. The act of casting Hex is no more subtle than the act of casting any other spell with VSM components. Now, moving the Hex to another target after the 1st target is dead, there is no RAW stating that is anything other than a purely mental act by the Warlock, and therefore not something that can be noticed.
2. Killing some small animal at the beginning of the day to fire up Hex is hugely evil, but if the DM allows Homebrew, they probably allow this as well.
3. A shopkeeper seeing someone casting a spell on them will certainly be infuriated and highly suspicious of that char. But if the spell was being moved only, as opposed to being initially cast, the shopkeeper would have zero knowledge anything was wrong. Now, if and when they start regularly failing Ability Checks for the particular Ability that was targeted, yeah, something might be figured out then. But that is DM Fiat on what would be the threshold. If the Shopkeeper was Hexed and the Strength ability targeted, and the Shopkeeper spent the day only doing the month end books, he would have no knowledge of being Hexed.
4. Now, mechanically speaking Hex loses its utility the higher the level of the Warlock. Even a Warlock focusing on EB will have better uses for Concentration at higher levels. Spirit Shroud might be superior to Hex in short range blaster fights, and something like Shadow of Moil is superior for all kinds of scenarios.
5. If a Hexblade Warlock, the Action Economy of Bonus Actions becomes a serious problem. Hexblade's Curse and Hex compete for that Bonus Action.
The indicator that it might be a bit more than simple mental effort to move Hex could be in the fact that it requires a bonus action to do just as casting the spell initially already is and it cannot be done in the same turn that the enemy that was under it's effects drops to 0 even if you still have your bonus action available when they do so. while there is no hard and fast rule there is just as much reason for a DM to decide it takes some kind of verbal or somatic piece to reposition it and the decision either way would be made by the DM at the table it is occuring at if it did come up for some reason.
As for 3. All of this is your opinion and you are giving no actual basis to support them. Just like has already been done in this thread. Your making a personal judgement call that they would not feel weaker being affected by it just because they are doing what you perceive as less strenuous tasks and just how much physical exertion and heavy lifting might be involved in that shop keepers afternoon of book keeping.
You show me in RAW in source books or Errata or tweets by a lead designer to back up your statements. Take your time..I will wait.
I've made these things throughout the thread. Show yours. I'm still waiting for people to do this. It hasn't happened. Burden of proof is on all of you that are trying to make it work this way.
The DM that Homebrews the use of Hex in this manner is a horrible DM.
I have played a ton of Warlocks (my favourite class), and as a DM throw them at my players.
So:
1. The act of casting Hex is no more subtle than the act of casting any other spell with VSM components. Now, moving the Hex to another target after the 1st target is dead, there is no RAW stating that is anything other than a purely mental act by the Warlock, and therefore not something that can be noticed.
2. Killing some small animal at the beginning of the day to fire up Hex is hugely evil, but if the DM allows Homebrew, they probably allow this as well.
3. A shopkeeper seeing someone casting a spell on them will certainly be infuriated and highly suspicious of that char. But if the spell was being moved only, as opposed to being initially cast, the shopkeeper would have zero knowledge anything was wrong. Now, if and when they start regularly failing Ability Checks for the particular Ability that was targeted, yeah, something might be figured out then. But that is DM Fiat on what would be the threshold. If the Shopkeeper was Hexed and the Strength ability targeted, and the Shopkeeper spent the day only doing the month end books, he would have no knowledge of being Hexed.
4. Now, mechanically speaking Hex loses its utility the higher the level of the Warlock. Even a Warlock focusing on EB will have better uses for Concentration at higher levels. Spirit Shroud might be superior to Hex in short range blaster fights, and something like Shadow of Moil is superior for all kinds of scenarios.
5. If a Hexblade Warlock, the Action Economy of Bonus Actions becomes a serious problem. Hexblade's Curse and Hex compete for that Bonus Action.
The indicator that it might be a bit more than simple mental effort to move Hex could be in the fact that it requires a bonus action to do just as casting the spell initially already is and it cannot be done in the same turn that the enemy that was under it's effects drops to 0 even if you still have your bonus action available when they do so. while there is no hard and fast rule there is just as much reason for a DM to decide it takes some kind of verbal or somatic piece to reposition it and the decision either way would be made by the DM at the table it is occuring at if it did come up for some reason.
As for 3. All of this is your opinion and you are giving no actual basis to support them. Just like has already been done in this thread. Your making a personal judgement call that they would not feel weaker being affected by it just because they are doing what you perceive as less strenuous tasks and just how much physical exertion and heavy lifting might be involved in that shop keepers afternoon of book keeping.
You show me in RAW in source books or Errata or tweets by a lead designer to back up your statements. Take your time..I will wait.
I've made these things throughout the thread. Show yours. I'm still waiting for people to do this. It hasn't happened. Burden of proof is on all of you that are trying to make it work this way.
You win...with warped logic like that, further discussion is impossible.
The DM that Homebrews the use of Hex in this manner is a horrible DM.
I have played a ton of Warlocks (my favourite class), and as a DM throw them at my players.
So:
1. The act of casting Hex is no more subtle than the act of casting any other spell with VSM components. Now, moving the Hex to another target after the 1st target is dead, there is no RAW stating that is anything other than a purely mental act by the Warlock, and therefore not something that can be noticed.
2. Killing some small animal at the beginning of the day to fire up Hex is hugely evil, but if the DM allows Homebrew, they probably allow this as well.
3. A shopkeeper seeing someone casting a spell on them will certainly be infuriated and highly suspicious of that char. But if the spell was being moved only, as opposed to being initially cast, the shopkeeper would have zero knowledge anything was wrong. Now, if and when they start regularly failing Ability Checks for the particular Ability that was targeted, yeah, something might be figured out then. But that is DM Fiat on what would be the threshold. If the Shopkeeper was Hexed and the Strength ability targeted, and the Shopkeeper spent the day only doing the month end books, he would have no knowledge of being Hexed.
4. Now, mechanically speaking Hex loses its utility the higher the level of the Warlock. Even a Warlock focusing on EB will have better uses for Concentration at higher levels. Spirit Shroud might be superior to Hex in short range blaster fights, and something like Shadow of Moil is superior for all kinds of scenarios.
5. If a Hexblade Warlock, the Action Economy of Bonus Actions becomes a serious problem. Hexblade's Curse and Hex compete for that Bonus Action.
The indicator that it might be a bit more than simple mental effort to move Hex could be in the fact that it requires a bonus action to do just as casting the spell initially already is and it cannot be done in the same turn that the enemy that was under it's effects drops to 0 even if you still have your bonus action available when they do so. while there is no hard and fast rule there is just as much reason for a DM to decide it takes some kind of verbal or somatic piece to reposition it and the decision either way would be made by the DM at the table it is occuring at if it did come up for some reason.
As for 3. All of this is your opinion and you are giving no actual basis to support them. Just like has already been done in this thread. Your making a personal judgement call that they would not feel weaker being affected by it just because they are doing what you perceive as less strenuous tasks and just how much physical exertion and heavy lifting might be involved in that shop keepers afternoon of book keeping.
You show me in RAW in source books or Errata or tweets by a lead designer to back up your statements. Take your time..I will wait.
I've made these things throughout the thread. Show yours. I'm still waiting for people to do this. It hasn't happened. Burden of proof is on all of you that are trying to make it work this way.
You win...with warped logic like that, further discussion is impossible.
I'm not using warped logic. Your not actually trying to discuss. Further discussion being impossible is entirely on you. Your dismissive deflection does not change this.
Edit to add you may want to reread pg 204 spell targeting again.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Again. You have not covered the basics of subtle. Perceptable Effect. Prove that Hex is not Perceptable when it's physically or mentally hindering a target.
Prove its not.
Hey keep home brewing shit.
I have given proof for my side of the debate and debunked the one time you provided any actual proof for yours. The issue here is that you can't prove that it is and it's your job to prove that your way of looking at it is actually viable. Demanding me to prove otherwise when I already am is not an argument. it's a childish denial.
You have provided no proof at all. You just assert your opinion as fact.
None of this is just opinion. This is all Proof through logical conclusion or extrapolation of the rules as they stand without trying to bias them to a particular end result.
Again all of that is your opinion. You read the rules, you are making judgement calls on what makes something perceptible that is an opinion, once you make a judgement call it is an opinion. That is what everyone is doing. Lightning bolt tells you it creates a giant bolt of lighting. Charm doesn't describe any viable phenomena. They do say at the end of charm you know. The rule is if the effect is not perceptible it likely wont be noticed on the target. What makes something perceptible. That is entirely a table decision, it can be as strict as your interpretation or even more permissive than mine.
Everyone is reading the rules and making a logical conclusion through extrapolation of the rules. You for some reason think your interpretation is the only logical one.
Mine is simple. If a spell does not explain how it effects the target, not just what the it does the target its the DMs job to flavor that spell to the world. Some spell description by the DM may lead it to be imperceptible others perceptible. I can't think of how any damage effects would be imperceptible, like with hex the damage potion is necrotic odds are the DM is going to describe that as instantaneous festering or something. I do not see any way to make that imperceptible.
Slow is a fairly dramatic effect, you move slower, you act slower, its hard to say you would not notice that, feeblemind hard not to notice you now have a 1 intelligence. In both these cases you wouldn't necessarily feel the spell hitting but you would notice the effects. Like suggestion, if you see them cast it you probably put it together, if its totally outside your character you probably put it together but that does not mean you felt the spell. You just made a logical deduction that you would not randomly give a way your horse to a peasant.In all these cases you know something has happened to you or can put it together. And for things like feeblemind depending on age.health people might just think it was a stroke and since you are incapable of any thought, if you understood them explaining that to you you might agree. But unless the DM flavored the spell in a way you might not know hey someone is casting a spell on me, you just know you are now moving slow, you are now dumb as a rock, after the fact you know you were manipulated in some way and hey that dude in robes told me to give away my horse, eff that guy. Spell in all cases is probably the most likely answer, so people may go there, but maybe someone in shadier circles might think they were poisoned as that is how they would apply an effect like this.
The GM can flavor all those in ways where they notice it on the spot, you feel a arcane energies wrapping around your body slowing you to a near standstill, you feel a the wizards mind crushing down on your consciousness destroying all capability to think, you feel a compulsion take over after the wizard speaks and you feel compelled to give away your horse as soon as you see the next peasant.
Now we get to hex, the effect if not taking damage is you do a little worse on attribute checks. Is that perceptible, well it sort of depends on how the DM flavors it. People just miss checks due to rolling bad which in the narrative means they just screwed up, people do that all the time. A GM can say, the target suddenly feels sapped of energy and when attempting to lift the object they fail, they suck at wrestling now etc, and then 5 other things that fit disadvantage for each attribute, or they could just go with man he sure is unlucky and missed that roll as all the target knows is they failed a skill check. Like suggestion they may put it together at some point, like if you keep the curse on them all day, there comes a point in a magical world where people will say okay this goes beyond bad luck.
So is it a subtle bad luck effect more akin to a suggestion where you don't feel it effects but maybe can put it together or is it more akin to a suggestion where the DM flavors it as the person feeling a compulsion take hold. Me its an enchantment and bad luck as one constant descriptor is easier than 6, because sapped of energy might not work for why you are perfectly fine lifting weight and wrestling but now are tripping over your tongue. Enchantments in general need to be subtle in order to function well. Not all will be subtle but I'd say its a default if the effect isn't dramatic or state otherwise.
Personally I think pg 204 showing that unless the effect is perceptible the target is unaware of the effect would be pretty pointless if all spells were effectively perceptible because pretty much all spells with a target effect a target negatively or positively. I also think suggestion would be worthless if played in a way the target felt the compulsion take hold at the time the spell went into effect. So for me clearly suggestion does not have a perceptible effect in my games, you can figure out you were subject to it depending on the suggestion and how it was worded or if you saw it be cast on you. So is hex more like suggestion where you don't feel its effects but maybe figure it out later, or is the effect obvious and pronounced like a feeble mind where you are suddenly incapable of any thought or language. That is up to the DM and either way its just a table decision and not some RAW rule.
The prof is as simple as the existence of Subtle Spell. This sage advice confirms that even using Subtle spell, if a spell requires material components, which HEX DOES, then the spell is still perceptible.
Logic dictates that if it’s still perceptible while using material components WITH Subtle Spell, it’s going to be even MORE so without the use of Subtle Spell.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It says a more subtle effect such as reading ones thoughts. As in not particularly physically affecting or intruding upon the other target in any particular way. it in no way aids your case.
This is partly because you still not have reasonably crossed the hurdle of Subtle Effect yet. You have in no way shown that your active use of a spell to hinder anothers Actual abilities (as in their mind and body directly) is in any way not noticable. Things like Reading ones thoughts and detecting things does not Actively Hinder the target in any way.
No it says unless a spell has a perceptible effect might it might not be noticed at all by the target. Then it uses lightning as a the obvious perceptible effect and detect thoughts as the not obvious and spells more like detect thoughts unless it specifies it in the spell description will usually go unnoticed. Suggestion hinders a target, heck it may hinder a target for up to a year and a day with mass suggestion. And yet its, subtle. Hex in its description does not say a giant red rune appears on the target, black lightning crackles from the warlock fingers cursing their victim. It has no description indicating a perceptible effect. If A GM decides that its an obvious irritant like muscle cramps wrack your body so you are having trouble lifting things they can, but the GM can also rule its more of a bad luck effect with no noticeable effect.
You are just flat out wrong here on your basic premise of how spells are treated. It is not does it actively hinder the target, it is does it have a perceptible effect.
Again. You have not covered the basics of subtle. Perceptable Effect. Prove that Hex is not Perceptable when it's physically or mentally hindering a target. This is your bar. Get over it or it doesn't matter how much you carry on it's not working like this. You are never showing that Hex is anywhere even close to detect thoughts at all. Slow is a detectable effect and is not subtle. it actively hinders the enemy in some way yet it has little outward visual signs of it taking place to general outsiders and does not deal any damage at all what so ever.
Hex is so not subtle that it actually reacts to any combat blows jarring it's target to automatically cause damage as well when that happens automatically. This is not subtle in any way. This is basically in some ways that lightning. Just because your not actively hitting them does not change this fact either or the spell as a whole.
Even if your DM decides they want it to be different that is a home brew for your table specifically but not how it works for those without that home brew. your fine to do that home brew. I'm not saying you can't. What I am saying is without that home brew it doesn't work that way.
You have to see the target and you simultaneously make sound, active movement and have to hold a material component. Saying you can use it to Hex a shopkeeper at BEST is a stealth check at disadvantage to not be seen. Again- you’ve got a highly permissive DM if you are allowed to engage in such shenanigans. Clearly the intent of the ability curse is to hinder enemy restrain/grapple checks and dispel magi/counterspell checks.
You wanna use it on a shopkeeper? Get some meta magic and subtle spell.
I'd totally allow it, given the shopkeeper was distracted somehow. It is absolutely a subtle effect as it only activates in certain discrete events. If those events don't happen right away, there is no RAW that states that hex is noticeable. Regardless, the rules around this are vague enough that definitively dismissing it as homebrew is not really appropriate.
Not knowing you're hexed/cursed until you've suffered through several unlucky mishaps is a common fantasy trope that would be fun to play out in D&D. Warlock spell slots aren't cheap, so there's a significant cost here and it totally feels like one of the ways a warlock would use magic outside of combat.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Here's the problem. There is nothing that is saying it isn't noticable except when people are predisposed to wanting it to not be noticable. And there is nothing discrete about combat nor should it be classified as a discrete event. So even with the "vagueness" as you see it of the rules. Dismissing it as a homebrew decision is entirely appropriate because that is what it is.
Not Knowing your Hexed or Cursed is very different from the Hex spell that we have in 5e that we are discussing. That trope is Based entirely around things more along the lines of Geas and Bestow Curse (though these aren't entirely a fitting anology) instead which do not necessarily debilitate the one that is affected by them right away and when it finally does there may not be anything around to give them suspicion of a source or to think there is any reasonable foul play in action so it takes time and various circumstances to reach that conclusion. This is very different from the Hex spell we are talking about.
Also that significant cost your talking about is compensated for. Both in the automatic upcasting of spells that use those slots and the ease with which the slots return since they are gotten back by a short rest, and by other features and abilities of the Warlock class in general as a function including a number of spells at their disposal that don't actually take their spell slots to cast even when their spell slots are used up. So To some Extent. Warlock Spells are cheap. They just aren't endlessly reusable in any one given small chunk of time.
Prove its not.
Hey keep home brewing shit.
Casting the spell is not subtle, the effect is. To get it off you need someone to distract him or maybe its a outdoor market and you can cast it at 60 feet away. I am not a big proponent of this as it seems a silly use of a spell when you likely only have 2. But some people on the boards see to love it.
I have given proof for my side of the debate and debunked the one time you provided any actual proof for yours. The issue here is that you can't prove that it is and it's your job to prove that your way of looking at it is actually viable. Demanding me to prove otherwise when I already am is not an argument. it's a childish denial.
You have provided no proof at all. You just assert your opinion as fact.
No. You belittle my supporting statements (i.e. proof) because you don't like that they counter your opinion statements. Your only actual attempt of proof was to bring up a single rule without actually providing any supporting statements why that rule actually works in the way that you want it to, or even examples of other things that would support it working the same way. While I've both provided examples of things that should work the same way that you want it to but don't (like the charm spell) and ways that it does not work the way you want it to by other spells and details about the spell itself that speak against your attempted usage of it.
Providing all of these things to support my statements is proof.
Simply going "it doesn't work that way if the GM does not say it works that way and it doesn't matter if it actively hinders the target because the spell doesn't say it is!" Is what is actually providing no Proof.
Well I hate to say this but there is a great big piece of proof why the spell not saying it does is not actually supporting proof for a spell being Subtle. Most spells don't say that they are. Not Lightning Bolt, Not Slow, and Not even Detect Thoughts or Detect Magic, are subtle for the matter of discerning spells by sayin in their description that they are in any way subtle or not subtle. We only know that they are or are not because of the General rule outside of every single spell that says that they beither are because of the way they function without being Visibly flashy and that they do not actually hinder others in their ongoing affects, Or that they are not because they either are very flashy or in some way actually hinder the target affected by the spell.
Any Shop Keeper or any other NPC or PC running around is going to know when they suddenly don't feel right. There is no way around that. Hex is basically a magical spell that suddenly does not make them feel right. This is a perceivable affect on them. Just like They are going to know that their body is suddenly feeling sluggish and not moving the way they want it to if you cast slow on them. They may not know why that this is happening or that it's the Hex spell or the Slow Spell. But they are going to know these things are happening to them just in the same way that you would.
Things that they would not perceive is that your detecting things like magic on them, Changing their visible appearance through illusions unless they are looking in a mirror. The Wall of Force in the Room that they didn't see cast and are not touching. Or even the Invisible Mage Hand of the Arcane Trickster picking their pocket through a sleight of hand roll that they did not beat out with their own perception though in the case of that invisible hand. Though they may still see that object that was taken, such as their coin purse or healing potion, floating around the room on it's own with nothing seeming to be holding it afterward when it comes to that last one.
Charm by it's very nature is not a hinderence. Charm spells in their basic functionality are almost entirely based around the idea of making another creature go "hey I like you and we could be friends and I want to help you out or make you a deal." There is nothing about this that stands out. It can't cause them any harm or even any indirect harm from the spell itself, though it may cause them indirect harm through a third party harming them as they try to help you. But then it is called out as being Noticable after the spell ends in most cases as a general rule anyway.
Hex is not like Charm. Hex in several ways is the opposite of charm and is directly causing their body or mind to not work right in some way and that not working right can actually cause them physical harm. This is represented by them not being able to do tasks as well suddenly when the spell targets them and by the 1d6 damage die. OTHER people in the room might not know that they are hexed or suddenly not feeling right because it doesn't affect them so it can be considered subtle as far as other customers or perhaps the Merchants guard standing in the room is conconcerned (assuming you hide your spell casting in the first place) but that's as subtle as it gets and that is other People not hindered and affected by the spell Like the Shop Keeper that is being affected by the spell. Even the Invocations of Hex that the warlock can put on it aren't subtle by either lashing out at the people around the one that you've hexed or by giving you the power to teleport to the hexed target at 30' range. This is just another indicator of the lack of subtlety that Hex has on it's target.
Another Example of a non-subtle spell on the person that it's affecting like Slow and like Hex is Feeblemind. Feeblemind hinders a target and that person that is affected by it is going to know they are not right. But it hinders them so much and in such specific ways that they are not going to be able process what not feeling right means to any real extent or just how they don't feel right or even be able to express that they don't feel right or that it caused them pain as it shattered their mind to hinder them. But Feeblemind is also far more potent than the piddly level 1 spell Hex. Hex wishes it grows up some day to be like Feeblemind because Feeblemind is in several ways the ultimate version of Hex because it is one of the most powerful curses that PC's can use magic to inflict on another person in 5e.
Or we can just plain go with real world examples for Proof that Hex is not subtle. Every single one of us has had moments in our actual lives where we go. "I'm just not suddenly feeling right. I don't know what's wrong with me but I feel like I might be getting sick or something. What did I get into or what did I eat?" And other things like that. The exception with us feeling this way however is that we do not live in a world where magic actually exists and it is known and in some ways feared by non-magic users that people will do things like this too them So that when these feelings over come them right in the middle of dealing with a bunch of strangers that the reason they are suddenly feeling that way may actually be the strangers themselves. Whether They assume your group poisoned them. Cast a spell on them somehow that they did or didn't notice or did it to them in some other way such as through some magical item or some ally of yours lurking where the Shop Keeper cannot see them.
None of this is just opinion. This is all Proof through logical conclusion or extrapolation of the rules as they stand without trying to bias them to a particular end result.
My opinion is Hex is not a subtle spell to cast, it requires vocal somantic and material components which are pretty hard to hide in a small shop. Sure you can try to distract the shopkeeper with another party member but chances are the shopkeeper has an employee or guards to help keep an eye on possible thieves when a group of people enter their shop together. The open market situation is more plausible, however you will still need to be out of sight of most passerbys while still having line of sight to your target. This may be difficult to do if the market is even remotely busy.
As for the argument that the target won't know whether the spell has a negative or positive effect, I will ask you this: if your character encounters somebody you've never seen before or maybe somebody you barely know and you see that person cast a spell at you without your permission or telling you what they are about to cast. Will you treat that person as hostile?
The DM that Homebrews the use of Hex in this manner is a horrible DM.
I have played a ton of Warlocks (my favourite class), and as a DM throw them at my players.
So:
1. The act of casting Hex is no more subtle than the act of casting any other spell with VSM components. Now, moving the Hex to another target after the 1st target is dead, there is no RAW stating that is anything other than a purely mental act by the Warlock, and therefore not something that can be noticed.
2. Killing some small animal at the beginning of the day to fire up Hex is hugely evil, but if the DM allows Homebrew, they probably allow this as well.
3. A shopkeeper seeing someone casting a spell on them will certainly be infuriated and highly suspicious of that char. But if the spell was being moved only, as opposed to being initially cast, the shopkeeper would have zero knowledge anything was wrong. Now, if and when they start regularly failing Ability Checks for the particular Ability that was targeted, yeah, something might be figured out then. But that is DM Fiat on what would be the threshold. If the Shopkeeper was Hexed and the Strength ability targeted, and the Shopkeeper spent the day only doing the month end books, he would have no knowledge of being Hexed.
4. Now, mechanically speaking Hex loses its utility the higher the level of the Warlock. Even a Warlock focusing on EB will have better uses for Concentration at higher levels. Spirit Shroud might be superior to Hex in short range blaster fights, and something like Shadow of Moil is superior for all kinds of scenarios.
5. If a Hexblade Warlock, the Action Economy of Bonus Actions becomes a serious problem. Hexblade's Curse and Hex compete for that Bonus Action.
The indicator that it might be a bit more than simple mental effort to move Hex could be in the fact that it requires a bonus action to do just as casting the spell initially already is and it cannot be done in the same turn that the enemy that was under it's effects drops to 0 even if you still have your bonus action available when they do so. while there is no hard and fast rule there is just as much reason for a DM to decide it takes some kind of verbal or somatic piece to reposition it and the decision either way would be made by the DM at the table it is occuring at if it did come up for some reason.
As for 3. All of this is your opinion and you are giving no actual basis to support them. Just like has already been done in this thread. Your making a personal judgement call that they would not feel weaker being affected by it just because they are doing what you perceive as less strenuous tasks and just how much physical exertion and heavy lifting might be involved in that shop keepers afternoon of book keeping.
You show me in RAW in source books or Errata or tweets by a lead designer to back up your statements. Take your time..I will wait.
I've made these things throughout the thread. Show yours. I'm still waiting for people to do this. It hasn't happened. Burden of proof is on all of you that are trying to make it work this way.
You win...with warped logic like that, further discussion is impossible.
I'm not using warped logic. Your not actually trying to discuss. Further discussion being impossible is entirely on you. Your dismissive deflection does not change this.
Again all of that is your opinion. You read the rules, you are making judgement calls on what makes something perceptible that is an opinion, once you make a judgement call it is an opinion. That is what everyone is doing. Lightning bolt tells you it creates a giant bolt of lighting. Charm doesn't describe any viable phenomena. They do say at the end of charm you know. The rule is if the effect is not perceptible it likely wont be noticed on the target. What makes something perceptible. That is entirely a table decision, it can be as strict as your interpretation or even more permissive than mine.
Everyone is reading the rules and making a logical conclusion through extrapolation of the rules. You for some reason think your interpretation is the only logical one.
Mine is simple. If a spell does not explain how it effects the target, not just what the it does the target its the DMs job to flavor that spell to the world. Some spell description by the DM may lead it to be imperceptible others perceptible. I can't think of how any damage effects would be imperceptible, like with hex the damage potion is necrotic odds are the DM is going to describe that as instantaneous festering or something. I do not see any way to make that imperceptible.
Slow is a fairly dramatic effect, you move slower, you act slower, its hard to say you would not notice that, feeblemind hard not to notice you now have a 1 intelligence. In both these cases you wouldn't necessarily feel the spell hitting but you would notice the effects. Like suggestion, if you see them cast it you probably put it together, if its totally outside your character you probably put it together but that does not mean you felt the spell. You just made a logical deduction that you would not randomly give a way your horse to a peasant.In all these cases you know something has happened to you or can put it together. And for things like feeblemind depending on age.health people might just think it was a stroke and since you are incapable of any thought, if you understood them explaining that to you you might agree. But unless the DM flavored the spell in a way you might not know hey someone is casting a spell on me, you just know you are now moving slow, you are now dumb as a rock, after the fact you know you were manipulated in some way and hey that dude in robes told me to give away my horse, eff that guy. Spell in all cases is probably the most likely answer, so people may go there, but maybe someone in shadier circles might think they were poisoned as that is how they would apply an effect like this.
The GM can flavor all those in ways where they notice it on the spot, you feel a arcane energies wrapping around your body slowing you to a near standstill, you feel a the wizards mind crushing down on your consciousness destroying all capability to think, you feel a compulsion take over after the wizard speaks and you feel compelled to give away your horse as soon as you see the next peasant.
Now we get to hex, the effect if not taking damage is you do a little worse on attribute checks. Is that perceptible, well it sort of depends on how the DM flavors it. People just miss checks due to rolling bad which in the narrative means they just screwed up, people do that all the time. A GM can say, the target suddenly feels sapped of energy and when attempting to lift the object they fail, they suck at wrestling now etc, and then 5 other things that fit disadvantage for each attribute, or they could just go with man he sure is unlucky and missed that roll as all the target knows is they failed a skill check. Like suggestion they may put it together at some point, like if you keep the curse on them all day, there comes a point in a magical world where people will say okay this goes beyond bad luck.
So is it a subtle bad luck effect more akin to a suggestion where you don't feel it effects but maybe can put it together or is it more akin to a suggestion where the DM flavors it as the person feeling a compulsion take hold. Me its an enchantment and bad luck as one constant descriptor is easier than 6, because sapped of energy might not work for why you are perfectly fine lifting weight and wrestling but now are tripping over your tongue. Enchantments in general need to be subtle in order to function well. Not all will be subtle but I'd say its a default if the effect isn't dramatic or state otherwise.
Personally I think pg 204 showing that unless the effect is perceptible the target is unaware of the effect would be pretty pointless if all spells were effectively perceptible because pretty much all spells with a target effect a target negatively or positively. I also think suggestion would be worthless if played in a way the target felt the compulsion take hold at the time the spell went into effect. So for me clearly suggestion does not have a perceptible effect in my games, you can figure out you were subject to it depending on the suggestion and how it was worded or if you saw it be cast on you. So is hex more like suggestion where you don't feel its effects but maybe figure it out later, or is the effect obvious and pronounced like a feeble mind where you are suddenly incapable of any thought or language. That is up to the DM and either way its just a table decision and not some RAW rule.
The prof is as simple as the existence of Subtle Spell. This sage advice confirms that even using Subtle spell, if a spell requires material components, which HEX DOES, then the spell is still perceptible.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/sac/sage-advice-compendium#Sorcerer
Logic dictates that if it’s still perceptible while using material components WITH Subtle Spell, it’s going to be even MORE so without the use of Subtle Spell.