I'm running CoS and adding in the dark gifts from AL. I'm curious how #8 may affect spellcasters:
The character awakens with a parched feeling in their throat and their face has lost any semblance of a mouth. The character no longer needs to eat or drink and gains the ability to communicate telepathically with any creature within 30 feet with whom they share a language, but cannot otherwise speak.
No mouth and no ability to verbalise means no casting spells with a verbal component. I’d advise dumping it on casters unless you want to have a really unhappy player on your hands.
If you are looking for a possible work around that keeps play balance I might do the following, PC uses Telepathic Spell casting: Spell casting by PC is sent telepathically to all intelligent creatures in a 100' radius (greater IMHO then normal spell casting to keep some balance) and opponents who try and counter spells get a +1 to their counter attempts.
A verbal component doesn’t have to be words, just have them make some other kind of sound so they’re not getting silent spell metamagic for free. They clap their hands in a certain pattern, or snap or stomp their feet or play their own belly like a bongo, or they have a staff with strings of shells and stones that rattles.
A verbal component doesn’t have to be words, just have them make some other kind of sound so they’re not getting silent spell metamagic for free. They clap their hands in a certain pattern, or snap or stomp their feet or play their own belly like a bongo, or they have a staff with strings of shells and stones that rattles.
A verbal component doesn’t have to be words, just have them make some other kind of sound so they’re not getting silent spell metamagic for free. They clap their hands in a certain pattern, or snap or stomp their feet or play their own belly like a bongo, or they have a staff with strings of shells and stones that rattles.
Great, now I have to check if plain English is overridden by something in a book to counter this... ;-)
That said the still have a nose and vocal cords, so I probably would allow them to hum their verbal components (if I'm feeling spicy I might homebrew something like a reduced DC on their spells for the first few days while they adjust)
Verbal (V) Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. 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. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can't cast a spell with a verbal component.
An argument could be made for finding a non speaking way to generate the needed pitch and resonance for magic, but probably would need downtime
Considering a character who is gagged can't cast a spell with a verbal component, i'd assume the same goes for one without a mouth and tongue to chant the mystic words required.
Considering a character who is gagged can't cast a spell with a verbal component, i'd assume the same goes for one without a mouth and tongue to chant the mystic words required.
RAW this is correct, I suppose I should have made my downtime suggestion being homebrew clearer.
In the past, not is the hyper comparative power balance of today, I played in a game where the no-speaking PC cast a 1st level spell to be able to cast spells with out speaking. This spell was focused to specific cases and not for PC's, NPCs would can speak being able to cast spells without speaking. I remember at during the first rendition of the ability it was cast a 1st level spell for every spell cast, which was a bit much in terms of play balance but had a lot of RP effects.
I'm running CoS and adding in the dark gifts from AL. I'm curious how #8 may affect spellcasters:
The character awakens with a parched feeling in their throat and their face has lost any semblance of a mouth. The character no longer needs to eat or drink and gains the ability to communicate telepathically with any creature within 30 feet with whom they share a language, but cannot otherwise speak.
My friend was playing in CoS as a cleric and got a curse where he couldn't cast somatic spells. That lasted for at least a level. He took it like a champ as it's just part of the game. The party had to find a way to cure him which became its own side quest.
If the first reaction to a major handicap presented by the rules is to homebrew something to work around it, why even bother imposing the handicap?
RAW was covered in the first response, I find the conversation of how to still have a meaningful handycap while not turning a spellcaster into a high hp commoner interesting.
I just hate disabling a character long term, if I was playing a wizard and lost 90% of my spellcasting for more than a session I'd probably leave the game.
If the first reaction to a major handicap presented by the rules is to homebrew something to work around it, why even bother imposing the handicap?
RAW was covered in the first response, I find the conversation of how to still have a meaningful handycap while not turning a spellcaster into a high hp commoner interesting.
I just hate disabling a character long term, if I was playing a wizard and lost 90% of my spellcasting for more than a session I'd probably leave the game.
That's fair. Look into the player's spellbook, see how much they're actually losing. It might not actually be much.
The Temple was pretty close to the finale for us. Are you also getting near the end of the adventure?
If the first reaction to a major handicap presented by the rules is to homebrew something to work around it, why even bother imposing the handicap?
RAW was covered in the first response, I find the conversation of how to still have a meaningful handycap while not turning a spellcaster into a high hp commoner interesting.
I just hate disabling a character long term, if I was playing a wizard and lost 90% of my spellcasting for more than a session I'd probably leave the game.
That's fair. Look into the player's spellbook, see how much they're actually losing. It might not actually be much.
The Temple was pretty close to the finale for us. Are you also getting near the end of the adventure?
Of the >210 wizard spells, about 30 do not require a V component (and only 8 are in the PHB). Long term silencing of a wizard doesn't seem like fun at the table at all.
If your DM allows it then its fine. As one before mentioned, as long as there is sound, and the DM agrees, then run with it.
Just understand a few caveats
The RAI (Rules as Intended): Means for a (V) verbal component to be spoken.
The RAF (Rules as Fun): Means sure, you want a mute spellcaster to still work then come up with an in-game equivalent to 'vocalized' sound. Keep in mind the mouthless caster should not receive an advantage compared to a 'regular' caster.
The moment you alter a core mechanic, keep in mind some players will try to exploit it. They will want a free 'Silent Spell' or say that the NPC's can't notice their caster's location because no mouth and therefor who know where the sound comes from, etc. This is not the intent of the rules, or the alteration.
In the end it is your game. Don't care what others think, just run with it and keep it balanced. Never let a cool concept be warped into an unfair advantage, as that will sour other players. Otherwise, have fun with it!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember there are Rules as Written (RAW), Rules as Intended (RAI), and Rules as Fun (RAF). There's some great RAW, RAI, and RAF here... please check in with your DM to determine how they want to adjudicate the RAW/RAI/RAF for your game.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm running CoS and adding in the dark gifts from AL. I'm curious how #8 may affect spellcasters:
The character awakens with a parched feeling in their throat and their face has lost any semblance of a mouth. The character no longer needs to eat or drink and gains the ability to communicate telepathically with any creature within 30 feet with whom they share a language, but cannot otherwise speak.
No mouth and no ability to verbalise means no casting spells with a verbal component. I’d advise dumping it on casters unless you want to have a really unhappy player on your hands.
If you are looking for a possible work around that keeps play balance I might do the following, PC uses Telepathic Spell casting: Spell casting by PC is sent telepathically to all intelligent creatures in a 100' radius (greater IMHO then normal spell casting to keep some balance) and opponents who try and counter spells get a +1 to their counter attempts.
A verbal component doesn’t have to be words, just have them make some other kind of sound so they’re not getting silent spell metamagic for free. They clap their hands in a certain pattern, or snap or stomp their feet or play their own belly like a bongo, or they have a staff with strings of shells and stones that rattles.
Nope! Verbal means you do need words.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/verbal
"Semper in faecibus sumus, solo profundum variat"
playing since 1986
Great, now I have to check if plain English is overridden by something in a book to counter this... ;-)
That said the still have a nose and vocal cords, so I probably would allow them to hum their verbal components (if I'm feeling spicy I might homebrew something like a reduced DC on their spells for the first few days while they adjust)
From the book
Verbal (V)
Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. 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. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can't cast a spell with a verbal component.
An argument could be made for finding a non speaking way to generate the needed pitch and resonance for magic, but probably would need downtime
I have no mouth and I must cast.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Considering a character who is gagged can't cast a spell with a verbal component, i'd assume the same goes for one without a mouth and tongue to chant the mystic words required.
RAW this is correct, I suppose I should have made my downtime suggestion being homebrew clearer.
In the past, not is the hyper comparative power balance of today, I played in a game where the no-speaking PC cast a 1st level spell to be able to cast spells with out speaking. This spell was focused to specific cases and not for PC's, NPCs would can speak being able to cast spells without speaking. I remember at during the first rendition of the ability it was cast a 1st level spell for every spell cast, which was a bit much in terms of play balance but had a lot of RP effects.
My friend was playing in CoS as a cleric and got a curse where he couldn't cast somatic spells. That lasted for at least a level. He took it like a champ as it's just part of the game. The party had to find a way to cure him which became its own side quest.
These things are curses, after all. You know, like the Curse of Strahd.
If the first reaction to a major handicap presented by the rules is to homebrew something to work around it, why even bother imposing the handicap?
RAW was covered in the first response, I find the conversation of how to still have a meaningful handycap while not turning a spellcaster into a high hp commoner interesting.
I just hate disabling a character long term, if I was playing a wizard and lost 90% of my spellcasting for more than a session I'd probably leave the game.
That's fair. Look into the player's spellbook, see how much they're actually losing. It might not actually be much.
The Temple was pretty close to the finale for us. Are you also getting near the end of the adventure?
Of the >210 wizard spells, about 30 do not require a V component (and only 8 are in the PHB). Long term silencing of a wizard doesn't seem like fun at the table at all.
If they have lots of spells like friends and true strike and illusory script, maybe silencing them won't be such a detriment.
If your DM allows it then its fine. As one before mentioned, as long as there is sound, and the DM agrees, then run with it.
Just understand a few caveats
In the end it is your game. Don't care what others think, just run with it and keep it balanced. Never let a cool concept be warped into an unfair advantage, as that will sour other players. Otherwise, have fun with it!
Remember there are Rules as Written (RAW), Rules as Intended (RAI), and Rules as Fun (RAF). There's some great RAW, RAI, and RAF here... please check in with your DM to determine how they want to adjudicate the RAW/RAI/RAF for your game.