I've read through several threads about verbal components of a spell. The new rules state following: "A Verbal component is the chanting of esoteric words that sound like nonsense to the uninitiated. The words must be uttered in a normal speaking voice. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion."
Does every creature in the world use the same "chanting of esoteric words that sound like nonsense"? If you don't speak the language of the creature, how would you know if they are speaking or casting a spell?
Example - A creature is invisible (but outlined in Faerie Fire) and is attempting to cast a spell with a verbal component. The creature only speaks in a language that none of the players understand. The creature has never spoken to the party previously. The wizard uses his reaction to cast Counterspell. How did the wizard know the difference between "Hi, how are you doing today" and a spell. Doesn't this make the "esoteric words" less esoteric if very creature no matter what plane they exist on use the same combinations of sounds and intonations?
Every creature casting spells with verbal components are chanting of esoteric words with combination of sounds, pitch and resonance that to me is very distinct from someone talking even a unknown language. As DM i would describe as very unatural verbiage
Every creature casting spells with verbal components are chanting of esoteric words with combination of sounds, pitch and resonance that to me is very distinct from someone talking even a unknown language. As DM i would describe as very unatural verbiage
This!
Also, many believe that Magic was created in the 1st World of Dragons before Humanoids destroyed it, and thus, Draconic tends to be the language of Magic, so many of the casters that I create always speak Draconic, and that is what they mumble together for the casting.
Just my take though :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty. Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers; Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas. Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
Also, if you look at most typical examples of an incantation, it’s maybe three or four words maximum. In a setting where magic is a thing that’s known to exist, I would expect most laypeople will start looking for some magic effect when someone makes a brief incomprehensible utterance, particularly when it will typically be accompanied by waving their hands and/or an object (commonly a staff, holy symbol, etc.) around. Plus, regardless of whether or not everyone uses the same words, other casters will probably recognize the act of casting in the same way an experienced martial artist can probably recognize when someone is taking a fighting stance even if they know nothing of the other person’s technique.
I understand that is the ruleset, but are we saying that spell casting - which the consensus seems to indicate that every wizard can cast the same spell slightly differently - has such atypical tonal qualities that it completely distinguishable from every language spoken from common, elvish, abysmal, demonic, draconian, etc., etc.
That seems like if you put eight people in a room with one of each person speaking Latin, Hebrew, a slavic language, a Chinese dialect, a romance language, a germanic language, Khoisan and and one person casting a spell with a verbal component - everyone knows who the caster is.
Yes, I know its all made up, but it just seems to be stretching the imagination to make it fit in world.
But that would require that there is still something qualitatively different between Draconic (a language) and casting a spell. Otherwise, all your Dragonborn and Dragons could cast spells with verbal components and no one (who didn't speak Draconic) would know the difference.
That is exactly what I was asking - how does one know a spell is being cast, if they have no idea what language is being spoken. In your case - they are using Draconic to cast spell and talk normally. Obvious to the other Draconic speaker, oblivious to the non-Draconic speaker.
Always up to DM of course, but i would effectively rule that out of 8 speakers, you could distinctively make up which one is casting a spell with verbal components.
He's the one chanting weirdly, which to a caster is evidently spellcasting, and to an uninitiated just sound like nonsense.
Now could such chanting be mimic with a Charisma check to the point of fooling someone, this would be up to DM.
Yes, I know its all made up, but it just seems to be stretching the imagination to make it fit in world.
We are all playing a game of make-believe that for the most part takes place in our imaginations, as a 'theater of the mind'...
Being stuck on how spells are cast seems odd, but if that is your boundary for your willing suspension of disbelief, who am I to judge.
For me, the vagueness of the description in the section of the PHB is so that people can flavor their spellcasting as they wish, not so that it seems fake or confusing, but again this is just my opinion.
If you are the DM at your table, you can tweak the Verbal part of spellcasting any way you wish as long as your players agree to play by those said rules.
Cheers!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty. Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers; Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas. Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
Example - A creature is invisible (but outlined in Faerie Fire) and is attempting to cast a spell with a verbal component. The creature only speaks in a language that none of the players understand. The creature has never spoken to the party previously. The wizard uses his reaction to cast Counterspell.
Well, not that it takes away from the question, but RAW the wizard could not use counterspell here, because they still need to be able to see the caster
faerie fire prevents an invisible creature from gaining the benefits of the Invisible condition, but it doesn't actually make them visible
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Example - A creature is invisible (but outlined in Faerie Fire) and is attempting to cast a spell with a verbal component. The creature only speaks in a language that none of the players understand. The creature has never spoken to the party previously. The wizard uses his reaction to cast Counterspell.
Well, not that it takes away from the question, but RAW the wizard could not use counterspell here, because they still need to be able to see the caster
faerie fire prevents an invisible creature from gaining the benefits of the Invisible condition, but it doesn't actually make them visible
Invisibility is an effect of the invisible condition, nothing more.
I know this is a hot topic, but if someone mute made noises that were of the right pitch and tone, would they be able to cast verbal components?
There’s no specific rule expressly covering this, but it’s worth noting that there’s a particular NPC cleric block who have their tongues removed in emulation of their deity specifically have it mentioned in their spell casting trait that they ignore V components, so the only official analog I know of to this scenario called for a special exemption. For better or worse, D&D has refused to take an official position on how to make major handicaps work for a PC, but all indications from source material are you need the degree of fine control associated with a functioning tongue and vocal cords to produce V components.
Example - A creature is invisible (but outlined in Faerie Fire) and is attempting to cast a spell with a verbal component. The creature only speaks in a language that none of the players understand. The creature has never spoken to the party previously. The wizard uses his reaction to cast Counterspell.
Well, not that it takes away from the question, but RAW the wizard could not use counterspell here, because they still need to be able to see the caster
faerie fire prevents an invisible creature from gaining the benefits of the Invisible condition, but it doesn't actually make them visible
Invisibility is an effect of the invisible condition, nothing more.
While you have the Invisible condition, you experience the following effects.
Surprise. If you’re Invisible when you roll Initiative, you have Advantage on the roll.
Concealed. You aren’t affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed.
Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Disadvantage, and your attack rolls have Advantage. If a creature can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit against that creature.
If faerie fire were intended to make invisible things visible, it would say so. Instead it very specifically says those things "can’t benefit from the Invisible condition." Those benefits are listed above
Most of the time, there's no mechanical difference between being visible and not benefitting from the Invisible condition. This is one of the exceptions
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Example - A creature is invisible (but outlined in Faerie Fire) and is attempting to cast a spell with a verbal component. The creature only speaks in a language that none of the players understand. The creature has never spoken to the party previously. The wizard uses his reaction to cast Counterspell.
Well, not that it takes away from the question, but RAW the wizard could not use counterspell here, because they still need to be able to see the caster
faerie fire prevents an invisible creature from gaining the benefits of the Invisible condition, but it doesn't actually make them visible
Invisibility is an effect of the invisible condition, nothing more.
While you have the Invisible condition, you experience the following effects.
Surprise. If you’re Invisible when you roll Initiative, you have Advantage on the roll.
Concealed. You aren’t affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed.
Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Disadvantage, and your attack rolls have Advantage. If a creature can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit against that creature.
If faerie fire were intended to make invisible things visible, it would say so. Instead it very specifically says those things "can’t benefit from the Invisible condition." Those benefits are listed above
Most of the time, there's no mechanical difference between being visible and not benefitting from the Invisible condition. This is one of the exceptions
"Concealed. You aren’t affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed." That is what makes you invisible.
How i have long played it, that it is up to the player to flavor their spells, and if asked, describe how their spell casting looks and sound. You can have them cast in a known language or an unknown one.
My Gnoll sorcerer would always grunt, cackle and bellow when he was casting an offensive spell, where as a support or utility spell would sound like choral singing.
My human warlock would always cast in infernal. despite not being pact of the fiend.
My half elf wizard would speak in Rhyming couplets that were mixes of Elvish and common.
and my tiefling cleric would speak in common and recite verses that invoked the effect like he was citing scripture.
Flavor is free and the books have been coy with exact words. Ed Greenwood, creator of the forgotten realms has a video of what spellcast looks like in the realms according to his original intent, but it is not prescriptive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
"Concealed. You aren’t affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed." That is what makes you invisible.
The trigger for counterspell is not an "effect"
This is off-topic for the thread, so if you really want to keep discussing it, we can start a different thread. RAW, though, faerie fire does not make invisible things visible. It outlines them in pretty light, and you can see the outline, but you still can't see the invisible thing
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
going back to the OP - in my head the verbal components are actually not a part of any language. There are well over 3000 different possible (human) speech sounds (Speech Sounds in the World’s Languages • City, University of London) so think of the verbal components as being made up of linked but otherwise meaningless phonemes whose sole atributes are to "tickle" the weave in certain ways activating various effects. all mages use these the same sets of phonemes as they are the ones known to work. part of spell research is trying to identify new and different sets of phonemes that activate specifically desired magical effects.
So you seem to indicate that each spell is unlocked by a specific set of sounds. Magic Missile is different from Invisibility, etc. But that goes to my specific question. Is Magic Missile cast by any race, species, aberration, fiend - using the same set of sounds and intonations? If so, then it would be obvious to the PC they are casting a spell, and be able to cast Counterspell. However, if every caster can have a different set of vocalizations (because has others of said - they are not prescribed) then how does a human know when a fiend is casting a spell? That's the crux of my problem.
But mentioning the weave, does trigger something. Actually I would much prefer that when a spell is being cast - one can (if trained) see the weave forming around them (a la The Wheel of Time). That would make much more sense to me and still require one to see the caster to Counterspell . It would mean every creature casting would have the weave regardless of spoken words and it would not matter what type the creature is. It would also mean one could passibly discern the spell being cast by studying the weave. I think that is how I will think of it going forward.
I understand all that - but my question was: if you can cast a spell in different ways with different languages - how would a human PC who does not know a language, know that a fiend is casting a spell versus just talking. So its not a question of flavor, its a question of who/what they are encountering.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I've read through several threads about verbal components of a spell. The new rules state following: "A Verbal component is the chanting of esoteric words that sound like nonsense to the uninitiated. The words must be uttered in a normal speaking voice. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion."
Does every creature in the world use the same "chanting of esoteric words that sound like nonsense"? If you don't speak the language of the creature, how would you know if they are speaking or casting a spell?
Example - A creature is invisible (but outlined in Faerie Fire) and is attempting to cast a spell with a verbal component. The creature only speaks in a language that none of the players understand. The creature has never spoken to the party previously. The wizard uses his reaction to cast Counterspell. How did the wizard know the difference between "Hi, how are you doing today" and a spell. Doesn't this make the "esoteric words" less esoteric if very creature no matter what plane they exist on use the same combinations of sounds and intonations?
Every creature casting spells with verbal components are chanting of esoteric words with combination of sounds, pitch and resonance that to me is very distinct from someone talking even a unknown language. As DM i would describe as very unatural verbiage
This!
Also, many believe that Magic was created in the 1st World of Dragons before Humanoids destroyed it, and thus, Draconic tends to be the language of Magic, so many of the casters that I create always speak Draconic, and that is what they mumble together for the casting.
Just my take though :)
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty.
Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers;
Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas.
Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
Also, if you look at most typical examples of an incantation, it’s maybe three or four words maximum. In a setting where magic is a thing that’s known to exist, I would expect most laypeople will start looking for some magic effect when someone makes a brief incomprehensible utterance, particularly when it will typically be accompanied by waving their hands and/or an object (commonly a staff, holy symbol, etc.) around. Plus, regardless of whether or not everyone uses the same words, other casters will probably recognize the act of casting in the same way an experienced martial artist can probably recognize when someone is taking a fighting stance even if they know nothing of the other person’s technique.
I understand that is the ruleset, but are we saying that spell casting - which the consensus seems to indicate that every wizard can cast the same spell slightly differently - has such atypical tonal qualities that it completely distinguishable from every language spoken from common, elvish, abysmal, demonic, draconian, etc., etc.
That seems like if you put eight people in a room with one of each person speaking Latin, Hebrew, a slavic language, a Chinese dialect, a romance language, a germanic language, Khoisan and and one person casting a spell with a verbal component - everyone knows who the caster is.
Yes, I know its all made up, but it just seems to be stretching the imagination to make it fit in world.
But that would require that there is still something qualitatively different between Draconic (a language) and casting a spell. Otherwise, all your Dragonborn and Dragons could cast spells with verbal components and no one (who didn't speak Draconic) would know the difference.
That is exactly what I was asking - how does one know a spell is being cast, if they have no idea what language is being spoken. In your case - they are using Draconic to cast spell and talk normally. Obvious to the other Draconic speaker, oblivious to the non-Draconic speaker.
Always up to DM of course, but i would effectively rule that out of 8 speakers, you could distinctively make up which one is casting a spell with verbal components.
He's the one chanting weirdly, which to a caster is evidently spellcasting, and to an uninitiated just sound like nonsense.
Now could such chanting be mimic with a Charisma check to the point of fooling someone, this would be up to DM.
We are all playing a game of make-believe that for the most part takes place in our imaginations, as a 'theater of the mind'...
Being stuck on how spells are cast seems odd, but if that is your boundary for your willing suspension of disbelief, who am I to judge.
For me, the vagueness of the description in the section of the PHB is so that people can flavor their spellcasting as they wish, not so that it seems fake or confusing, but again this is just my opinion.
If you are the DM at your table, you can tweak the Verbal part of spellcasting any way you wish as long as your players agree to play by those said rules.
Cheers!
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty.
Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers;
Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas.
Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
Well, not that it takes away from the question, but RAW the wizard could not use counterspell here, because they still need to be able to see the caster
faerie fire prevents an invisible creature from gaining the benefits of the Invisible condition, but it doesn't actually make them visible
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Invisibility is an effect of the invisible condition, nothing more.
I know this is a hot topic, but if someone mute made noises that were of the right pitch and tone, would they be able to cast verbal components?
Roll for Initiative: [roll]1d20+7[/roll]
Proud member of the EVIL JEFF CULT! PRAISE JEFF!
Homebrew Races: HERE Homebrew Spells: HERE Homebrew Monsters: HERE
MORE OF ME! (And platypodes/platypi/platypuses) (Extended signature)
There’s no specific rule expressly covering this, but it’s worth noting that there’s a particular NPC cleric block who have their tongues removed in emulation of their deity specifically have it mentioned in their spell casting trait that they ignore V components, so the only official analog I know of to this scenario called for a special exemption. For better or worse, D&D has refused to take an official position on how to make major handicaps work for a PC, but all indications from source material are you need the degree of fine control associated with a functioning tongue and vocal cords to produce V components.
It, uhh, isn't
If faerie fire were intended to make invisible things visible, it would say so. Instead it very specifically says those things "can’t benefit from the Invisible condition." Those benefits are listed above
Most of the time, there's no mechanical difference between being visible and not benefitting from the Invisible condition. This is one of the exceptions
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Being outlined in neon light seems to meet the requirement for “unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you”
"Concealed. You aren’t affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed." That is what makes you invisible.
How i have long played it, that it is up to the player to flavor their spells, and if asked, describe how their spell casting looks and sound. You can have them cast in a known language or an unknown one.
My Gnoll sorcerer would always grunt, cackle and bellow when he was casting an offensive spell, where as a support or utility spell would sound like choral singing.
My human warlock would always cast in infernal. despite not being pact of the fiend.
My half elf wizard would speak in Rhyming couplets that were mixes of Elvish and common.
and my tiefling cleric would speak in common and recite verses that invoked the effect like he was citing scripture.
Flavor is free and the books have been coy with exact words. Ed Greenwood, creator of the forgotten realms has a video of what spellcast looks like in the realms according to his original intent, but it is not prescriptive.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
The trigger for counterspell is not an "effect"
This is off-topic for the thread, so if you really want to keep discussing it, we can start a different thread. RAW, though, faerie fire does not make invisible things visible. It outlines them in pretty light, and you can see the outline, but you still can't see the invisible thing
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
going back to the OP - in my head the verbal components are actually not a part of any language. There are well over 3000 different possible (human) speech sounds
(Speech Sounds in the World’s Languages • City, University of London) so think of the verbal components as being made up of linked but otherwise meaningless phonemes whose sole atributes are to "tickle" the weave in certain ways activating various effects. all mages use these the same sets of phonemes as they are the ones known to work. part of spell research is trying to identify new and different sets of phonemes that activate specifically desired magical effects.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
So you seem to indicate that each spell is unlocked by a specific set of sounds. Magic Missile is different from Invisibility, etc. But that goes to my specific question. Is Magic Missile cast by any race, species, aberration, fiend - using the same set of sounds and intonations? If so, then it would be obvious to the PC they are casting a spell, and be able to cast Counterspell. However, if every caster can have a different set of vocalizations (because has others of said - they are not prescribed) then how does a human know when a fiend is casting a spell? That's the crux of my problem.
But mentioning the weave, does trigger something. Actually I would much prefer that when a spell is being cast - one can (if trained) see the weave forming around them (a la The Wheel of Time). That would make much more sense to me and still require one to see the caster to Counterspell . It would mean every creature casting would have the weave regardless of spoken words and it would not matter what type the creature is. It would also mean one could passibly discern the spell being cast by studying the weave. I think that is how I will think of it going forward.
I understand all that - but my question was: if you can cast a spell in different ways with different languages - how would a human PC who does not know a language, know that a fiend is casting a spell versus just talking. So its not a question of flavor, its a question of who/what they are encountering.