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.
I want to point out two things. First of all you had to say I think for these. Second of all there are a number of spells that target a target that do not create a negative or a positive affect upon them. I have made mention of ways to do this in my posts that you are ignoring while you are making this long drawn out post that still actually provides no support or weight to your side. Instead you've decided to deflect it all off on the DM as your defense with the absence of any other defence. But guess what. Even by your reasoning the spell still tells us what it does to the person. It affects their Ability checks based upon an Attribute and it has a damage component. These things are true no matter how a spell is flavored.
As for Suggestion. Read the way it is written. If this was an obvious detectable spell. Such as one that had a positive or negative affect on them and There is neither of these things as a part of the spell despite your assertion that basically all spells have such effects upon a target. They would know it was cast on them. But It's a charm spell which by the nature of charm spells are subtle (outside of the obviousness of casting spells in general). But this is one of the only charm spells that actually does not have the Specific Callout of most other charm spells that they immediately know that the spell was cast upon them afterwards merely by the effect of the spell.
Suggestion is just another example that if we compare it to Hex that Hex's effects are not subtle because they have far more effect even ignoring the damage component than Suggestion. There are even a bunch of actions that aren't even possible because of Suggestion because they would have detrimental affects on their body or mind and another inflicting harm on them breaks the spell as well. There is also the suggestion that what you try to have the person do through the spell has to be a reasonable request for them to accomplish to keep it subtle so that they are unaware. On top of that there is a possibility with suggestion that what you try to do with the request isn't performed at all even if successful if conditions on the spell that you choose as part of doing that request are not met, in which case it just expires.
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.
That is its casting. We are talking the effect. If you are cursed do you know you are cursed. If you have a suggestion on you do you know you have a suggestion on you. Some effects are obvious. Some per pg 204 are not. There is no guidelines in the game to determine which effects are obvious on you or more appropriately the NPCs or characters, when the DM makes you roll at disadvantage you the player knows, whether your character would know is the issue.
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.
I want to point out two things. First of all you had to say I think for these. Second of all there are a number of spells that target a target that do not create a negative or a positive affect upon them. I have made mention of ways to do this in my posts that you are ignoring while you are making this long drawn out post that still actually provides no support or weight to your side. Instead you've decided to deflect it all off on the DM as your defense with the absence of any other defence. But guess what. Even by your reasoning the spell still tells us what it does to the person. It affects their Ability checks based upon an Attribute and it has a damage component. These things are true no matter how a spell is flavored.
As for Suggestion. Read the way it is written. If this was an obvious detectable spell. Such as one that had a positive or negative affect on them and There is neither of these things as a part of the spell despite your assertion that basically all spells have such effects upon a target. They would know it was cast on them. But It's a charm spell which by the nature of charm spells are subtle (outside of the obviousness of casting spells in general). But this is one of the only charm spells that actually does not have the Specific Callout of most other charm spells that they immediately know that the spell was cast upon them afterwards merely by the effect of the spell.
Suggestion is just another example that if we compare it to Hex that Hex's effects are not subtle because they have far more effect even ignoring the damage component than Suggestion. There are even a bunch of actions that aren't even possible because of Suggestion because they would have detrimental affects on their body or mind and another inflicting harm on them breaks the spell as well. There is also the suggestion that what you try to have the person do through the spell has to be a reasonable request for them to accomplish to keep it subtle so that they are unaware. On top of that there is a possibility with suggestion that what you try to do with the request isn't performed at all even if successful if conditions on the spell that you choose as part of doing that request are not met, in which case it just expires.
Yes the spell does 2 things to a person, but whether a person notices its an effect on them is the question,. And nothing gives us guidance in that. And again pg 204 implies that many effects target a person and they have no idea they are effected by the spell.
Being mind controlled is a negative effect, every spell with a target has a negative or positive effect. As for long drawn out that was the first of mine like that, every one of yours is and in each of them you provide 0 evidence, you assert things, you state opinions as facts, but 0 evidence. And there is a difference in a person being able to figure out they had a compulsion on them and feeling mind controlled.
I understand your reasoning for why you came to your conclusion, but that is all it is your reasoning, your conclusion, aka as an opinion. One of these days you will understand other people can have different reasoning and come to different conclusions with the same facts presented. The only facts for this matter being spell descriptions and page 204. Those are all the facts. People are going to draw different conclusions from those fact. And you can say I am pushing it of on the DM, but that is exactly the design goal of 5E D&D. That is why things are not spelled out in absurd detail, it is supposed to be table dependent.
1. A person will always notice a spell being cast right in front of them.
2. The bonus action used to move the spell from creature to creature is undetectable, because there is no rule stating that using a bonus action is detectable.
3. pg 204 states it is up to the DM's call if this spell is noticed by the creature it targets or not. 100% up to the DM, unless a spell specifically states it is or isn't noticed, it's 100% up to the DM and thus this debate can't go anywhere.(There is precedent for charm spells that don't alert their target, charm effects that don't alert their target, and charm effect/spells that do alert their target, so you can go either way on this one).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
1. A person will always notice a spell being cast right in front of them.
2. The bonus action used to move the spell from creature to creature is undetectable, because there is no rule stating that using a bonus action is detectable.
3. pg 204 states it is up to the DM's call if this spell is noticed by the creature it targets or not. 100% up to the DM, unless a spell specifically states it is or isn't noticed, it's 100% up to the DM and thus this debate can't go anywhere.(There is precedent for charm spells that don't alert their target, charm effects that don't alert their target, and charm effect/spells that do alert their target, so you can go either way on this one).
2 is actually wrong because not only are many bonus actions detectable by their very nature. There is nothing that actually says any bonus action is not detectable in some way just like there is nothing that specifically says that most actual actions are not detectable in some way but there are many ways that it is detectable except when certain measures are taken to hide them.
Idk it never says anything about it, so I guess you could also say it's completely up the DM as well. Some bonus actions like making PAM are yeah, probably very noticeable, while Hex is arguable at best since it doesn't say anything.
The main argument for it i guess is that you don't need to do the V,S,M components or whatever. But again remember number 3, they might not notice you switching it, but depending on DM they might notice the effect itself. (I guess you could argue the same for PAM, they notice the effect of the attack the damage, not the bonus action used... but again no ruling here so completely up to DM).
Edit: In other words this really shouldn't of been 3 pages. It's like- there's no solid evidence cause the books go out of their way to dodge the question lol.
I guess it makes sense, the DM is responsible for a lot of things and a rule like this on what effects are noticed and what aren't would be complicated (imagine having to print on every spell if it was detected or not detected, yeah nobody doing that errata), also nobody is going to 100% agree with what WoTC determines is noticeable (since many spells are situational), and in general it would just be a huge mess.
If you were going to do to it for each spell it would be pretty easy, in the beginning of the chapter you define noticeable/not noticeable create a keyword for that put that in the stat block next to V,S,M.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I want to point out two things. First of all you had to say I think for these. Second of all there are a number of spells that target a target that do not create a negative or a positive affect upon them. I have made mention of ways to do this in my posts that you are ignoring while you are making this long drawn out post that still actually provides no support or weight to your side. Instead you've decided to deflect it all off on the DM as your defense with the absence of any other defence. But guess what. Even by your reasoning the spell still tells us what it does to the person. It affects their Ability checks based upon an Attribute and it has a damage component. These things are true no matter how a spell is flavored.
As for Suggestion. Read the way it is written. If this was an obvious detectable spell. Such as one that had a positive or negative affect on them and There is neither of these things as a part of the spell despite your assertion that basically all spells have such effects upon a target. They would know it was cast on them. But It's a charm spell which by the nature of charm spells are subtle (outside of the obviousness of casting spells in general). But this is one of the only charm spells that actually does not have the Specific Callout of most other charm spells that they immediately know that the spell was cast upon them afterwards merely by the effect of the spell.
Suggestion is just another example that if we compare it to Hex that Hex's effects are not subtle because they have far more effect even ignoring the damage component than Suggestion. There are even a bunch of actions that aren't even possible because of Suggestion because they would have detrimental affects on their body or mind and another inflicting harm on them breaks the spell as well. There is also the suggestion that what you try to have the person do through the spell has to be a reasonable request for them to accomplish to keep it subtle so that they are unaware. On top of that there is a possibility with suggestion that what you try to do with the request isn't performed at all even if successful if conditions on the spell that you choose as part of doing that request are not met, in which case it just expires.
That is its casting. We are talking the effect. If you are cursed do you know you are cursed. If you have a suggestion on you do you know you have a suggestion on you. Some effects are obvious. Some per pg 204 are not. There is no guidelines in the game to determine which effects are obvious on you or more appropriately the NPCs or characters, when the DM makes you roll at disadvantage you the player knows, whether your character would know is the issue.
Yes the spell does 2 things to a person, but whether a person notices its an effect on them is the question,. And nothing gives us guidance in that. And again pg 204 implies that many effects target a person and they have no idea they are effected by the spell.
Being mind controlled is a negative effect, every spell with a target has a negative or positive effect. As for long drawn out that was the first of mine like that, every one of yours is and in each of them you provide 0 evidence, you assert things, you state opinions as facts, but 0 evidence. And there is a difference in a person being able to figure out they had a compulsion on them and feeling mind controlled.
I understand your reasoning for why you came to your conclusion, but that is all it is your reasoning, your conclusion, aka as an opinion. One of these days you will understand other people can have different reasoning and come to different conclusions with the same facts presented. The only facts for this matter being spell descriptions and page 204. Those are all the facts. People are going to draw different conclusions from those fact. And you can say I am pushing it of on the DM, but that is exactly the design goal of 5E D&D. That is why things are not spelled out in absurd detail, it is supposed to be table dependent.
As we are going in circles, i am done with this.
Basically:
1. A person will always notice a spell being cast right in front of them.
2. The bonus action used to move the spell from creature to creature is undetectable, because there is no rule stating that using a bonus action is detectable.
3. pg 204 states it is up to the DM's call if this spell is noticed by the creature it targets or not. 100% up to the DM, unless a spell specifically states it is or isn't noticed, it's 100% up to the DM and thus this debate can't go anywhere.(There is precedent for charm spells that don't alert their target, charm effects that don't alert their target, and charm effect/spells that do alert their target, so you can go either way on this one).
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
2 is actually wrong because not only are many bonus actions detectable by their very nature. There is nothing that actually says any bonus action is not detectable in some way just like there is nothing that specifically says that most actual actions are not detectable in some way but there are many ways that it is detectable except when certain measures are taken to hide them.
Idk it never says anything about it, so I guess you could also say it's completely up the DM as well. Some bonus actions like making PAM are yeah, probably very noticeable, while Hex is arguable at best since it doesn't say anything.
The main argument for it i guess is that you don't need to do the V,S,M components or whatever. But again remember number 3, they might not notice you switching it, but depending on DM they might notice the effect itself. (I guess you could argue the same for PAM, they notice the effect of the attack the damage, not the bonus action used... but again no ruling here so completely up to DM).
Edit: In other words this really shouldn't of been 3 pages. It's like- there's no solid evidence cause the books go out of their way to dodge the question lol.
I guess it makes sense, the DM is responsible for a lot of things and a rule like this on what effects are noticed and what aren't would be complicated (imagine having to print on every spell if it was detected or not detected, yeah nobody doing that errata), also nobody is going to 100% agree with what WoTC determines is noticeable (since many spells are situational), and in general it would just be a huge mess.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
If you were going to do to it for each spell it would be pretty easy, in the beginning of the chapter you define noticeable/not noticeable create a keyword for that put that in the stat block next to V,S,M.