A warlock in my campaign intends to use his Eyes of the Runekeeper invocation in exchange for access to a private library w/o cost.
However, the city he is in has a strong bias against warlocks (not all spellcasters, just warlocks and druids, because STORY). So my specific question is this: Is there anything visible or obvious about using Eyes of the Runekeeper? The more general question - Eldritch Blast aside - is "are innvocations with no stated visible effect, visible?" Is there any telltale sign like flashing eyes, whiff of brimstone/pine/whatever?
For example, Comprehend Languages (a 1st level spell this warlock also has) is a "spell", something that has components that can be seen/heard/etc. It has a comparable (greater) effect to EotRK, but casting that spell would clearly *be* casting a spell. In this case, the librarians know what wizards do and what those costs (monetary and social) are....
Casting a spell is casting a spell, some invocations describe a visual tell (cloak of flies for instance) if none is stated then there needs to be a conversation of expectations between player and gm.
I would advise any GM not to use this as a got ya technique (oh by the way they know you're a warlock now because you used this ability that doesn't have a specific visual component in the book). That's just going to cause hard feelings at the table (there is a place for "your character knows his eyes glow green when reading a language he can't speak, do you still do that? But this should be addressed before the player commits to a plan.
If you're using the rules in XGtE for a binding mark, invocations might be apparent in the mark (and it will be obvious that the character is a warlock whether or not invocations are visible). Otherwise, invocations that let you cast a spell are as visible as casting that spell normally is, other effects do not specify though some things are inherently obvious, such as using One with the Shadows to turn invisible.
I think a lot of invocations are open for some "cosmetic effect", might be worth pushing it back to the player and ask them to come up with some "effects" for their invocations.
A few off the top of my head for Eyes of the Rune Kepper could be:
Their eyes change colour depnding on what is being read; normal eye colour (blue to brown etc) for basic langiages like elf or dwarf, completely white with a very slight radiant quality for celestial, deep red for Infernal, completely black for abysaal etc....
The Warlock has no visible effects but hears a voice (possibly their patron) whisper the translation into their ear, if soemone with See Invisibility or True Sight witnesses it maybe they see a vague appiration standing close behind the warlock.
The Invocation actually manifests as a pair of spectacles on the warlocsk nose and he has to constantly push them up his nose to keep them in place whilst he translates the text.
The Warlock (but no-one else) actually sees a magical decoding wheel over the text that shifts and moves until it has decoded each letter/word and then it reveals the cohesive sentence.
I had no intention of doing a gotcha. I did some quick research during the session when the player brought it up, found nothing, but luckily the resolution of his action is planned for *next* session. I figured the invocations that say "cast this spell at will" would be obvious spellcasting; these extremely un-fluff-texted invocations ("You can read all written text") left me wondering if there was a General Rule that I might have missed.
Sounds like, no, it's open to interpretation, for both good and bad. "Rule of Cool" conflicting with (perhaps) wanting to fly under the radar. As the character has also chosen Mask of a Thousand Faces, and has a background of not just being a warlock, but one who has already escaped imprisonment for same once... I'm going to go with "no visible effect".
I do like the interesting idea of a ghostly apparition whispering the translations in his ear, visible with truesight. I'm not using that for story reasons (his powers are actually from ancient technology "so advanced as to be indistinguishable from magic" - Arthus C. Clarke), but you got me thinking about some other "hidden effects" that might be seen in *juuuuust* the right circumstances!
Sounds like, no, it's open to interpretation, for both good and bad. "Rule of Cool" conflicting with (perhaps) wanting to fly under the radar. As the character has also chosen Mask of a Thousand Faces, and has a background of not just being a warlock, but one who has already escaped imprisonment for same once... I'm going to go with "no visible effect".
Or you can declare that it's visible but Mask of a Thousand Faces can cover it up --- effects like glowing eyes or magical spectacles are well within the limits of what disguise self can cover.
A warlock in my campaign intends to use his Eyes of the Runekeeper invocation in exchange for access to a private library w/o cost.
However, the city he is in has a strong bias against warlocks (not all spellcasters, just warlocks and druids, because STORY). So my specific question is this: Is there anything visible or obvious about using Eyes of the Runekeeper? The more general question - Eldritch Blast aside - is "are innvocations with no stated visible effect, visible?" Is there any telltale sign like flashing eyes, whiff of brimstone/pine/whatever?
For example, Comprehend Languages (a 1st level spell this warlock also has) is a "spell", something that has components that can be seen/heard/etc. It has a comparable (greater) effect to EotRK, but casting that spell would clearly *be* casting a spell. In this case, the librarians know what wizards do and what those costs (monetary and social) are....
Casting a spell is casting a spell, some invocations describe a visual tell (cloak of flies for instance) if none is stated then there needs to be a conversation of expectations between player and gm.
I would advise any GM not to use this as a got ya technique (oh by the way they know you're a warlock now because you used this ability that doesn't have a specific visual component in the book). That's just going to cause hard feelings at the table (there is a place for "your character knows his eyes glow green when reading a language he can't speak, do you still do that? But this should be addressed before the player commits to a plan.
If you're using the rules in XGtE for a binding mark, invocations might be apparent in the mark (and it will be obvious that the character is a warlock whether or not invocations are visible). Otherwise, invocations that let you cast a spell are as visible as casting that spell normally is, other effects do not specify though some things are inherently obvious, such as using One with the Shadows to turn invisible.
I think a lot of invocations are open for some "cosmetic effect", might be worth pushing it back to the player and ask them to come up with some "effects" for their invocations.
A few off the top of my head for Eyes of the Rune Kepper could be:
Their eyes change colour depnding on what is being read; normal eye colour (blue to brown etc) for basic langiages like elf or dwarf, completely white with a very slight radiant quality for celestial, deep red for Infernal, completely black for abysaal etc....
The Warlock has no visible effects but hears a voice (possibly their patron) whisper the translation into their ear, if soemone with See Invisibility or True Sight witnesses it maybe they see a vague appiration standing close behind the warlock.
The Invocation actually manifests as a pair of spectacles on the warlocsk nose and he has to constantly push them up his nose to keep them in place whilst he translates the text.
The Warlock (but no-one else) actually sees a magical decoding wheel over the text that shifts and moves until it has decoded each letter/word and then it reveals the cohesive sentence.
Thanks to those who responded!
I had no intention of doing a gotcha. I did some quick research during the session when the player brought it up, found nothing, but luckily the resolution of his action is planned for *next* session. I figured the invocations that say "cast this spell at will" would be obvious spellcasting; these extremely un-fluff-texted invocations ("You can read all written text") left me wondering if there was a General Rule that I might have missed.
Sounds like, no, it's open to interpretation, for both good and bad. "Rule of Cool" conflicting with (perhaps) wanting to fly under the radar. As the character has also chosen Mask of a Thousand Faces, and has a background of not just being a warlock, but one who has already escaped imprisonment for same once... I'm going to go with "no visible effect".
I do like the interesting idea of a ghostly apparition whispering the translations in his ear, visible with truesight. I'm not using that for story reasons (his powers are actually from ancient technology "so advanced as to be indistinguishable from magic" - Arthus C. Clarke), but you got me thinking about some other "hidden effects" that might be seen in *juuuuust* the right circumstances!
Or you can declare that it's visible but Mask of a Thousand Faces can cover it up --- effects like glowing eyes or magical spectacles are well within the limits of what disguise self can cover.