There was a debate in a different forum about a spell caster trying to cast a spell and keeping the somatic part hidden from others.
One guy was going on about how the somatic are big flashy gestures. Think Dr. Strange.
However, the spell that started the debate was a Minor Illusion Cantrip. So I reasoned that any spell that an action or bonus action i.e.not a spell that takes a minute or more to cast should have the ability to cast it hidden based on level. Meaning the higher the spell level more serious the somatic's
In my game it has actually only come up a few times and just gave them a skill check.
So I created a table based on Spell Level. Using Dex bonus on the roll. Automatic failure on a natural one.
General rule of thumb is that V and S components are noticeable to anyone within eye/earshot paying attention, particularly given that there’s a specific class feature for eliminating them. Personally I wouldn’t make it an active part of the casting, but a Perception check on the part of relevant watchers. Somewhere in the 10-15 range; would need to crunch some numbers to get a good sense of it. Personally I wouldn’t favor the caster too much, though; the design intent is that casting a spell is not something that’s easily concealed.
I was thinking more if the caster was intentionally trying to keep it hidden. Truly in my games it has only come up once or twice, and as they were simple spells I just let it happen.
Something like the Minor Illusion cantrip I would just think it was a twisting of the fingers behind your back or something.
I'd start at "no" and then possibly change that depending upon circumstances. There are features that help greatly with keeping your spellcasting hidden by removing all or some of the components (like subtle spell), I can't see why those should be devalued by letting anyone do it just with a skill check.
If I was to allow it then I certainly wouldn't have it be easier with a lower level spell, possibly for a BA or reaction spell due to swiftness but that could go the other way too as you have less time to cover it up.
Nor would I have any check be based on Dex. I'd go with spellcasting stat or possibly default to Int as, IMO, this isn't about being agile, it's about being skilled enough with your magic.
And lastly, any check would likely only cover M and/or S components. Any V component would need "in world" cover (distance, noisy surroundings or similar).
XGtE indicates that unless all components have been eliminated, a casting can be perceived. Also, for V it’s less a matter of forcing a character to scream an incantation at the top of their lungs than a matter of disallowing “I mutter the spell under my breath” stuff; see above regarding the relation between presence of components and perceptibility. This doesn’t mean everyone automatically knows every time someone casts a spell, but I’d say it’s less a matter of allowing the caster to actively conceal what they’re doing and more a matter of determining if the other party was able to notice it, which is why I favor perception checks.
Sorcerers need to spend one of their few metamagic options to even be able to have this as an option, then sorcery points every time they actually want to do it. But you’re giving it away for free to any wizard, warlock or arcane trickster rogue who wants to try? Why can’t sorcerers have nice things?
Yeah, spell components exist in the first place to indicate that spells are noticable. This ability exists in the game at a rather steep cost (if you're taking this metamagic you're passing up another option that would be relevant more often), so essentially giving it away for free is not very fair.
But you say you got this idea from a debate (where people were undoubtedly saying the same thing), so you know all this and have chosen to do your own thing. Hope it works out for your group.
I ran a game using similar rules. The players were really happy.
Right up until the point an evil bad guy™ used it on them. Then there was wailing and lamenting and complaining. "Why can't I use counterspell? It's not fair?"
Now I make sure that when players suggest things like this, my first question is, "Are you sure you're happy for me to use this against your characters? Really sure? Really really sure?"
The sorcerers subtle spell ability actually takes away ALL chances of perceiving the casting. It also allows the caster to cast a spell with their hands tied and mouth covered, sorcerers do get great things. No failure allowed. You spent the point you positively cast the spell undetected or while tied and bound.
This idea just makes it possible to hide the casting. You still need to make some type of motion and some type of sound. It just gives the caster a chance to choose to cast it in a concealed way. It does not take away the chance of detecting it. It just makes it harder. If the caster fails his check the chance of detecting it is the same as normal.
What numeric values are applied to each check is still up for debate in my mind.
I ran a game using similar rules. The players were really happy.
Right up until the point an evil bad guy™ used it on them. Then there was wailing and lamenting and complaining. "Why can't I use counterspell? It's not fair?"
Now I make sure that when players suggest things like this, my first question is, "Are you sure you're happy for me to use this against your characters? Really sure? Really really sure?"
Most DMs tend to let the bad guy get a sneak attack in once in a while. No detection allowed. This idea just gives them a way to do it by way of a rule. It also gives the players a chance to do it back.
My take? Stop giving casters a free pass when it comes to components. Not only does this water down the sorcerers ability to use subtle spell, but in general it just makes casters even more powerful.
One of the biggest points of spellcasting is that magic is powerful, and the drawbacks of using it are that it can, depending on the spell, be obvious to anyone watching. That's what makes subtle spellcasting so incredibly dangerous. These checks and balances are key to keeping casters from dominating social and exploration encounters, and gives the players challenges to overcome (ie. we can't freely cast here, they'll see us, we have to try something else) and it gives the sorcerer a niche in which to shine.
If non-sorcerers want to be able to hide their spell casting, they have to invest progress and take the Metamagic Adept Feat. from TCoE - or take a 3 level dip into that class.
Homebrew: When there are no verbal components (and that's really not a lot of spells) i'd might let players roll a sleight of hand check, with a DC at least equal to the highest passive perception of anyone that can see them, depending on the roleplay situation. If anyone is focused at the caster, no roll. If the caster fails their check, potential targets get their reaction to interrupt, either by force or ducking out of sight etc. As a consequence, the spell fizzles and the spell slot is lost until the required amount of rest has been taken.
Most DMs tend to let the bad guy get a sneak attack in once in a while. No detection allowed.
Are you sure about that? It sound like not only railroading but also being adversarial to the party.
Now if the dm rolls stealth for the bad guy and if beats the passive perception of everyone that is a different matter, detection is allowed the players just fail to notice him.
And no neither the players nor the bad guy should be able to hide a spells casting without subtle spell.
The subtle spell ability is far far far more than just hiding the casting of a spell. Its not detectable at all. Even if someone is looking at you. That is the easy cheap use of the feature.
If the subtle spell feature is the sole reason you like the sorcerer then maybe the ability should be the main feature and not cost anything like points and should just be a normal ability.
There's rules that specifically say casting a spell is perceptible, and no rules for concealing it outside of features eliminating the components. Ergo, in the section specifically about the rules, the final word is "no, it's not possible to say 'I mutter the words quietly and hide my hands as I make the gesture'". Now, that said, that doesn't mean everyone in the area instantly gets a psychic notification whenever someone casts a spell, but by RAW it would more be a matter of the observer's Perception recognizing what is happening than the caster taking any action to conceal what is happening, and as several people have said spells being fairly noticeable is how you make Persuasion checks more viable than Charm Person in many cases and otherwise avoid allowing spells to marginalize a lot of mundane options for dealing with a non-combat encounter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There was a debate in a different forum about a spell caster trying to cast a spell and keeping the somatic part hidden from others.
One guy was going on about how the somatic are big flashy gestures. Think Dr. Strange.
However, the spell that started the debate was a Minor Illusion Cantrip. So I reasoned that any spell that an action or bonus action i.e.not a spell that takes a minute or more to cast should have the ability to cast it hidden based on level. Meaning the higher the spell level more serious the somatic's
In my game it has actually only come up a few times and just gave them a skill check.
So I created a table based on Spell Level. Using Dex bonus on the roll. Automatic failure on a natural one.
Cantrip - 2
Level 1 - 4
Level 2 - 7
Level 3 - 10
Level 4 - 13
Level 5 - 16
Level 6 - 19
Level 7- 22
Level 8 - 25
Level 9 - 28
General rule of thumb is that V and S components are noticeable to anyone within eye/earshot paying attention, particularly given that there’s a specific class feature for eliminating them. Personally I wouldn’t make it an active part of the casting, but a Perception check on the part of relevant watchers. Somewhere in the 10-15 range; would need to crunch some numbers to get a good sense of it. Personally I wouldn’t favor the caster too much, though; the design intent is that casting a spell is not something that’s easily concealed.
I was thinking more if the caster was intentionally trying to keep it hidden. Truly in my games it has only come up once or twice, and as they were simple spells I just let it happen.
Something like the Minor Illusion cantrip I would just think it was a twisting of the fingers behind your back or something.
Just hat the thought that a material component would be extra movement and would probably make it difficult to keep the action secret.
I'd start at "no" and then possibly change that depending upon circumstances. There are features that help greatly with keeping your spellcasting hidden by removing all or some of the components (like subtle spell), I can't see why those should be devalued by letting anyone do it just with a skill check.
If I was to allow it then I certainly wouldn't have it be easier with a lower level spell, possibly for a BA or reaction spell due to swiftness but that could go the other way too as you have less time to cover it up.
Nor would I have any check be based on Dex. I'd go with spellcasting stat or possibly default to Int as, IMO, this isn't about being agile, it's about being skilled enough with your magic.
And lastly, any check would likely only cover M and/or S components. Any V component would need "in world" cover (distance, noisy surroundings or similar).
In regards to all of this discussion there are no rules.
I have discussed the V with my table on occasions. I see no reason why one would have to go harry potter and yell their V all the time.
However, I would still use Dex as it is a movement and not a proficiency
XGtE indicates that unless all components have been eliminated, a casting can be perceived. Also, for V it’s less a matter of forcing a character to scream an incantation at the top of their lungs than a matter of disallowing “I mutter the spell under my breath” stuff; see above regarding the relation between presence of components and perceptibility. This doesn’t mean everyone automatically knows every time someone casts a spell, but I’d say it’s less a matter of allowing the caster to actively conceal what they’re doing and more a matter of determining if the other party was able to notice it, which is why I favor perception checks.
Sorcerers need to spend one of their few metamagic options to even be able to have this as an option, then sorcery points every time they actually want to do it. But you’re giving it away for free to any wizard, warlock or arcane trickster rogue who wants to try? Why can’t sorcerers have nice things?
Yeah, spell components exist in the first place to indicate that spells are noticable. This ability exists in the game at a rather steep cost (if you're taking this metamagic you're passing up another option that would be relevant more often), so essentially giving it away for free is not very fair.
But you say you got this idea from a debate (where people were undoubtedly saying the same thing), so you know all this and have chosen to do your own thing. Hope it works out for your group.
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
I ran a game using similar rules. The players were really happy.
Right up until the point an evil bad guy™ used it on them. Then there was wailing and lamenting and complaining. "Why can't I use counterspell? It's not fair?"
Now I make sure that when players suggest things like this, my first question is, "Are you sure you're happy for me to use this against your characters? Really sure? Really really sure?"
The sorcerers subtle spell ability actually takes away ALL chances of perceiving the casting. It also allows the caster to cast a spell with their hands tied and mouth covered, sorcerers do get great things. No failure allowed. You spent the point you positively cast the spell undetected or while tied and bound.
This idea just makes it possible to hide the casting. You still need to make some type of motion and some type of sound. It just gives the caster a chance to choose to cast it in a concealed way. It does not take away the chance of detecting it. It just makes it harder.
If the caster fails his check the chance of detecting it is the same as normal.
What numeric values are applied to each check is still up for debate in my mind.
Most DMs tend to let the bad guy get a sneak attack in once in a while. No detection allowed. This idea just gives them a way to do it by way of a rule. It also gives the players a chance to do it back.
My take? Stop giving casters a free pass when it comes to components. Not only does this water down the sorcerers ability to use subtle spell, but in general it just makes casters even more powerful.
One of the biggest points of spellcasting is that magic is powerful, and the drawbacks of using it are that it can, depending on the spell, be obvious to anyone watching. That's what makes subtle spellcasting so incredibly dangerous. These checks and balances are key to keeping casters from dominating social and exploration encounters, and gives the players challenges to overcome (ie. we can't freely cast here, they'll see us, we have to try something else) and it gives the sorcerer a niche in which to shine.
If non-sorcerers want to be able to hide their spell casting, they have to invest progress and take the Metamagic Adept Feat. from TCoE - or take a 3 level dip into that class.
Homebrew: When there are no verbal components (and that's really not a lot of spells) i'd might let players roll a sleight of hand check, with a DC at least equal to the highest passive perception of anyone that can see them, depending on the roleplay situation. If anyone is focused at the caster, no roll. If the caster fails their check, potential targets get their reaction to interrupt, either by force or ducking out of sight etc. As a consequence, the spell fizzles and the spell slot is lost until the required amount of rest has been taken.
Are you sure about that? It sound like not only railroading but also being adversarial to the party.
Now if the dm rolls stealth for the bad guy and if beats the passive perception of everyone that is a different matter, detection is allowed the players just fail to notice him.
And no neither the players nor the bad guy should be able to hide a spells casting without subtle spell.
Again
The subtle spell ability is far far far more than just hiding the casting of a spell. Its not detectable at all. Even if someone is looking at you.
That is the easy cheap use of the feature.
If the subtle spell feature is the sole reason you like the sorcerer then maybe the ability should be the main feature and not cost anything like points and should just be a normal ability.
There's rules that specifically say casting a spell is perceptible, and no rules for concealing it outside of features eliminating the components. Ergo, in the section specifically about the rules, the final word is "no, it's not possible to say 'I mutter the words quietly and hide my hands as I make the gesture'". Now, that said, that doesn't mean everyone in the area instantly gets a psychic notification whenever someone casts a spell, but by RAW it would more be a matter of the observer's Perception recognizing what is happening than the caster taking any action to conceal what is happening, and as several people have said spells being fairly noticeable is how you make Persuasion checks more viable than Charm Person in many cases and otherwise avoid allowing spells to marginalize a lot of mundane options for dealing with a non-combat encounter.