You "strongly disagree" that some spells might "easily go unnoticed." You've proclaimed that "spellcasting is supposed to be obvious." You've taken the position that spellcasting should be no harder to notice than a DC 10 Perception check, and agreed with the statement that that means "only people with a negative wisdom modifier and not proficient in perception wouldn't be able to hear it."
But hiding spellcasting is the purview of Sorcerer's and metamagic.
I don't really agree with that.
Subtle Spell metamagic allows you to cast a spell that normally has a V and S component and ignore those components. This means that a Sorc can cast while bound and gagged or while in a silenced area - etc.. No matter how stealthily or subtly a non-Sorc tries to cast a spell they will still need to do the V and S component - which means a Silence spell or a gag or binding their hands will stop them.
I think a non-Sorc asking to cast a little quieter being told to make a stealth or sleight of hand roll is acceptable. They at least have a chance to fail and you can change the DC as you see fit.
I'm not going to argue whether being able to hide spellcasting requires metamagic, but...
I think spellcasting should in general be as noticeable as any other action, like loading and firing a crossbow. I would expect verbal components to require being spoken at normal speaking volume (~50db). If it could be whispered at a barely (or non) audible level (10db or 1/10000 as loud), it would hardly be a "verbal" component.
I was going to say "oral," but didn't want to open that can of worms.
Pretty much they only thing the rules say for sure is that it is a sound that can be heard. It doesn't say how loud, but it does describe it as having to control tones. Whispering by definition doesn't use (or barely uses) the vocal cords and has very restricted pitch and tone control. So the verbal component must be over 40 decibels (the upper volume of human whispering). But that is more science than strictly written rules.
But that is what I go by. The rules say you have to be able to control pitch and tone and whispers can't do that, so it must be at normal speaking volume.
Yes, but again, be careful because in English we've laid ourselves this trap where "perceptible" can mean "capable of being perceived" or "has successfully been perceived" depending on the context you use it in. As long as we're on the same page that essentially, verbal components are perceptible pretty much the same way that speaking is perceptible (but maybe not actually perceived if you're quiet), and somatic components the way that moving your hands is perceptible (but maybe not actually perceived if you're subtle), and material components the way that holding an object is perceptible (but maybe not actually perceived if you're good at misdirection), etc.
Presumably spellcasting is visible enough that counterspell is a coherent spell. Also, making an attack breaks stealth, and presumably casting a spell on someone is an attack. As such, I would make spellcasting about as subtle as any other normal combat action.
Casting a spell on someone is not (necessarily) an attack. And the trigger of Counterspell is not "a creature within 60 feet casts a spell," it is "when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell." It is fully coherent that you might see a creature and not realize it is casting a spell, or know that a spell is being cast by someone but not see which of them is doing the casting.
I think that folks can argue this all they want but the bottom line is that there is NO right answer.
The rules indicate that spell components may be perceived. They do not indicate that they must be perceived. They do not indicate HOW perceptible these components are. They do not indicate the role of environmental effects.
The bottom line is that everyone can chime in with the rulings THEY use at THEIR table and they apply to no one else but themselves. If I decide whispered verbal components are fine then that is correct at my table. If I decide that verbal components require a normal speaking volume then that is fine at my table. If I decide that a caster has to loudly enunciate verbal components then that is also fine at my table. The problem with this topic is that there is no RAW regarding how loud any verbal component must be. There is no RAW on whether a somatic component has to move the hands 1m, 10cm, 1cm, 1mm or even less. Perhaps a twitch of the hand is all that is needed for a somatic component?
This is not a topic about convincing other folks about the correct interpretation (there isn't one), it is a topic about how YOU play it at your table.
---
Personally, I allow softly spoken verbal components but not whispers. I allow small somatic components that could be noticed but aren't very noticeable and relatively small, on the order of a few cm. My interpretation just happens to be that components are noticeable but depending on situation and environment might start around a DC15 perception check to be noticed depending on how far you are from the caster and ambient conditions. In a quiet library, hearing the verbal component of a spell at 20'-30' would probably be a DC10 perception check. In a noisy bar, standing next to the caster, noticing the verbal component of a spell might be a DC15. That's how I play it. There are too many factors involved in noticing the casting of any particular spell to (in my opinion) do anything but create a DC on the spot every time a spell is cast IF noticing it is relevant. Complicated rules to detecting spell casting would add nothing to the DM just creating what they think is an appropriate DC.
Anyway, play it how you want, but this isn't a topic anyone can win :)
---------
P.S. I think counterspell is a great example of how DMs might treat the perceptibility of spells differently ..
In combat, the rules make it pretty clear that characters are always watching, always looking around them. They are aware of attackers in front behind or on any side. They are paying attention to character movements. As a result, in combat, if a character has a view to a caster then they are aware if they begin to cast a spell (unless subtle meta magic is used) and can choose to counterspell if they are within 60'. (This includes high ambient noise or a creature behind 1/2 or 3/4 cover - just for the sake of fairness in my games - I realize an argument could be made that if you can't see the caster's hands or hear them then one could imagine circumstances where the spell might not be noticeable ... however, in combat situations, I don't go there).
However, if you are relaxing in a crowded noisy bar, a character is typically not paying attention to every person in the room simultaneously. In such a situation, the hands of the caster could well be blocked from the character by people in the way, the ambient noise might make it impossible to hear anything. Under these circumstances, I might use a passive perception check if I thought it might be noticed, or simply allow the spell to be cast without an opportunity for counterspell if, as he DM, I interpreted the situation as such that it would not be noticed. However, it would depend on circumstances. I know of characters with a high passive perception, who are usually alert and paying attention, who would likely notice a spell is being cast though in a crowd they won't know what spell or who or what the target might be.
Casting a spell on someone is not (necessarily) an attack. And the trigger of Counterspell is not "a creature within 60 feet casts a spell," it is "when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell." It is fully coherent that you might see a creature and not realize it is casting a spell, or know that a spell is being cast by someone but not see which of them is doing the casting.
The thing is, to actually be useful, counterspell has to trigger reasonably reliably. This implies "spells being cast by a target you can see are detected unless the caster takes active countermeasures", and the only countermeasures that obvious exist within the system are becoming not visible, sleight of hand for somatic components, or deception for verbal components, both of which are actions (though I would allow an arcane trickster to use cunning action).
I have usually assumed that spell casting requires normal speaking volume. You don't have to shout, and a mutter or mumble won't be clear enough. But it can be soft enough not to be heard on the other side of a thick door unless someone is actively listening for it. If someone were listening on the other side of the door I would have them make a perception check.
There isn't any official rule on it that I am aware of. Just as I don't recall any rule about how vigorous somatic components are, just that they require a free hand and some ability to move.
I quoted this. But really want to quote the whole thread.
You can’t do it while gagged. Probably because the gag effects the bilabial positioning of your tongue when speaking and enunciating. As well as throwing off slightly the tone and pitch.
you can’t do it in silence, because it has to be audible.
The verbal compent specifically says it’s not the words that important. It’s the pitch and etc. THE WORDS ARENT IMPORTANT. So, the important factor is the volume.
want to do it at a low volume so things can’t hear you? Which I can only assume is a power game way to try and not be counterspelled, or alert sentries/whoever for a perception check?
theres already a mechanic in place to allow you to do that: I give you. Sorcerer’s metamagic. SUBTLE SPELL.
by homebrewing you can be doing it at a volume that allows it to not trip perceptions or be counter able because it can’t be heard. (Due to the language in Counterspell, it implies magic MUST be perceptible enough to be seen from 60 feet away. How do you tell if someone is chewing gum or talking? The volume of their voice). For spells that only contain verbal components. By homebrewing you can whisper it and such as that. You are cheapening and taking away from Subtle Spell. Thus negating something that takes time and investment and has LIMITED USES. For something. You could arguably do whenever you want. Every 6 seconds for a whole day if you really wanted.
This has never come up at my table, but I'd rule that the verbal component is audible unless there is another loud source of noise. Also anyone who can see the spell caster can immediately know that they are casting a spell due to the verbal and/or somatic components. So if you're not seeing the caster and in a loud area, you will not know a spell was cast if it has no effect you can observe.
I'm old-school so tend to not use DC checks for things that I consider trivial for the PCs, so I wouldn't do a perception check.
This came up recently in my campaign, but I read through this thread looking for confirmation of my own interpretation and didn't find it.
Per the PHB, all verbal components are spoken with pitch and resonance. These two words and their definitions are fundamental to understanding verbal components. I'm not sure how some people believe that the definition is somehow vague or something that the DM needs to interpret. The rules could not be more clear.
Firstly, pitch refers to the frequency of sound, or the tone of the voice, also referred to as the register and ranging between high or low tones. The human voice can not produce a pitch when whispering. Hence, all verbal components are spoken aloud. Secondly, resonance refers to the amplification, intensification, or echoing of the sound, depending on usage. While this is likely far short of shouting the mystical words needed to cast the spell, it is most certainly done with force or vocal fortitude of some sort.
In short, vocal components are spoken aloud, most likely with a slightly raised voice or using the speaker's body cavity to create a resonating sound.
This was an interesting conversation. I actually came for a much different question on the verbal component. But before I get to that I'd like to add that I am relatively new to DnD so I'm no authority on this subject. I haven't seen any directions that says the verbal component must be spoken words that anyone else necessarily understands. for instance, a druid possibly using specific sounds of rushing wind to conjuring or become an air elemental. Stuff like that. Also, because nothing really says that hand gestures or material components have to be visible to anyone, I assumed that they could be done in pockets, behind something, under a table, etc., as long as they were used.
After reading this thread I'm wondering if casters are basically useless under water etc.
The reason I came here is because a very creative player at my table was grabbed tightly around the throat and lifted off the ground. He was rendered unable to speak. He thought for a bit and came up with the idea to use minor illusion which doesn't require a verbal component to make his verbal component. He argued that the sounds originate from him, his thought. No one knew what to do, but all agreed it was creative.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You "strongly disagree" that some spells might "easily go unnoticed." You've proclaimed that "spellcasting is supposed to be obvious." You've taken the position that spellcasting should be no harder to notice than a DC 10 Perception check, and agreed with the statement that that means "only people with a negative wisdom modifier and not proficient in perception wouldn't be able to hear it."
Huh, guess I misunderstood. My bad.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Easy =/= automatic.
I even outlined some situations where it wouldn't easily be noticed.
But hiding spellcasting is the purview of Sorcerer's and metamagic.
DCI: 3319125026
I don't really agree with that.
Subtle Spell metamagic allows you to cast a spell that normally has a V and S component and ignore those components. This means that a Sorc can cast while bound and gagged or while in a silenced area - etc.. No matter how stealthily or subtly a non-Sorc tries to cast a spell they will still need to do the V and S component - which means a Silence spell or a gag or binding their hands will stop them.
I think a non-Sorc asking to cast a little quieter being told to make a stealth or sleight of hand roll is acceptable. They at least have a chance to fail and you can change the DC as you see fit.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
I'm not going to argue whether being able to hide spellcasting requires metamagic, but...
I think spellcasting should in general be as noticeable as any other action, like loading and firing a crossbow. I would expect verbal components to require being spoken at normal speaking volume (~50db). If it could be whispered at a barely (or non) audible level (10db or 1/10000 as loud), it would hardly be a "verbal" component.
If a whisper isn't verbal, what is it?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I was going to say "oral," but didn't want to open that can of worms.
Pretty much they only thing the rules say for sure is that it is a sound that can be heard. It doesn't say how loud, but it does describe it as having to control tones. Whispering by definition doesn't use (or barely uses) the vocal cords and has very restricted pitch and tone control. So the verbal component must be over 40 decibels (the upper volume of human whispering). But that is more science than strictly written rules.
But that is what I go by. The rules say you have to be able to control pitch and tone and whispers can't do that, so it must be at normal speaking volume.
You're disagreeing with a line from the rule book?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
That quote is only about spell effects, of which the likes of charm person does not have any that are perceptible.
Components are explained in a different paragraph of the same section and says all components are perceptible.
Yes, but again, be careful because in English we've laid ourselves this trap where "perceptible" can mean "capable of being perceived" or "has successfully been perceived" depending on the context you use it in. As long as we're on the same page that essentially, verbal components are perceptible pretty much the same way that speaking is perceptible (but maybe not actually perceived if you're quiet), and somatic components the way that moving your hands is perceptible (but maybe not actually perceived if you're subtle), and material components the way that holding an object is perceptible (but maybe not actually perceived if you're good at misdirection), etc.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Presumably spellcasting is visible enough that counterspell is a coherent spell. Also, making an attack breaks stealth, and presumably casting a spell on someone is an attack. As such, I would make spellcasting about as subtle as any other normal combat action.
Casting a spell on someone is not (necessarily) an attack. And the trigger of Counterspell is not "a creature within 60 feet casts a spell," it is "when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell." It is fully coherent that you might see a creature and not realize it is casting a spell, or know that a spell is being cast by someone but not see which of them is doing the casting.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I think that folks can argue this all they want but the bottom line is that there is NO right answer.
The rules indicate that spell components may be perceived. They do not indicate that they must be perceived. They do not indicate HOW perceptible these components are. They do not indicate the role of environmental effects.
The bottom line is that everyone can chime in with the rulings THEY use at THEIR table and they apply to no one else but themselves. If I decide whispered verbal components are fine then that is correct at my table. If I decide that verbal components require a normal speaking volume then that is fine at my table. If I decide that a caster has to loudly enunciate verbal components then that is also fine at my table. The problem with this topic is that there is no RAW regarding how loud any verbal component must be. There is no RAW on whether a somatic component has to move the hands 1m, 10cm, 1cm, 1mm or even less. Perhaps a twitch of the hand is all that is needed for a somatic component?
This is not a topic about convincing other folks about the correct interpretation (there isn't one), it is a topic about how YOU play it at your table.
---
Personally, I allow softly spoken verbal components but not whispers. I allow small somatic components that could be noticed but aren't very noticeable and relatively small, on the order of a few cm. My interpretation just happens to be that components are noticeable but depending on situation and environment might start around a DC15 perception check to be noticed depending on how far you are from the caster and ambient conditions. In a quiet library, hearing the verbal component of a spell at 20'-30' would probably be a DC10 perception check. In a noisy bar, standing next to the caster, noticing the verbal component of a spell might be a DC15. That's how I play it. There are too many factors involved in noticing the casting of any particular spell to (in my opinion) do anything but create a DC on the spot every time a spell is cast IF noticing it is relevant. Complicated rules to detecting spell casting would add nothing to the DM just creating what they think is an appropriate DC.
Anyway, play it how you want, but this isn't a topic anyone can win :)
---------
P.S. I think counterspell is a great example of how DMs might treat the perceptibility of spells differently ..
In combat, the rules make it pretty clear that characters are always watching, always looking around them. They are aware of attackers in front behind or on any side. They are paying attention to character movements. As a result, in combat, if a character has a view to a caster then they are aware if they begin to cast a spell (unless subtle meta magic is used) and can choose to counterspell if they are within 60'. (This includes high ambient noise or a creature behind 1/2 or 3/4 cover - just for the sake of fairness in my games - I realize an argument could be made that if you can't see the caster's hands or hear them then one could imagine circumstances where the spell might not be noticeable ... however, in combat situations, I don't go there).
However, if you are relaxing in a crowded noisy bar, a character is typically not paying attention to every person in the room simultaneously. In such a situation, the hands of the caster could well be blocked from the character by people in the way, the ambient noise might make it impossible to hear anything. Under these circumstances, I might use a passive perception check if I thought it might be noticed, or simply allow the spell to be cast without an opportunity for counterspell if, as he DM, I interpreted the situation as such that it would not be noticed. However, it would depend on circumstances. I know of characters with a high passive perception, who are usually alert and paying attention, who would likely notice a spell is being cast though in a crowd they won't know what spell or who or what the target might be.
The thing is, to actually be useful, counterspell has to trigger reasonably reliably. This implies "spells being cast by a target you can see are detected unless the caster takes active countermeasures", and the only countermeasures that obvious exist within the system are becoming not visible, sleight of hand for somatic components, or deception for verbal components, both of which are actions (though I would allow an arcane trickster to use cunning action).
I quoted this. But really want to quote the whole thread.
You can’t do it while gagged. Probably because the gag effects the bilabial positioning of your tongue when speaking and enunciating. As well as throwing off slightly the tone and pitch.
you can’t do it in silence, because it has to be audible.
The verbal compent specifically says it’s not the words that important. It’s the pitch and etc. THE WORDS ARENT IMPORTANT. So, the important factor is the volume.
want to do it at a low volume so things can’t hear you? Which I can only assume is a power game way to try and not be counterspelled, or alert sentries/whoever for a perception check?
theres already a mechanic in place to allow you to do that: I give you. Sorcerer’s metamagic. SUBTLE SPELL.
by homebrewing you can be doing it at a volume that allows it to not trip perceptions or be counter able because it can’t be heard. (Due to the language in Counterspell, it implies magic MUST be perceptible enough to be seen from 60 feet away. How do you tell if someone is chewing gum or talking? The volume of their voice). For spells that only contain verbal components. By homebrewing you can whisper it and such as that. You are cheapening and taking away from Subtle Spell. Thus negating something that takes time and investment and has LIMITED USES. For something. You could arguably do whenever you want. Every 6 seconds for a whole day if you really wanted.
Blank
This has never come up at my table, but I'd rule that the verbal component is audible unless there is another loud source of noise. Also anyone who can see the spell caster can immediately know that they are casting a spell due to the verbal and/or somatic components. So if you're not seeing the caster and in a loud area, you will not know a spell was cast if it has no effect you can observe.
I'm old-school so tend to not use DC checks for things that I consider trivial for the PCs, so I wouldn't do a perception check.
This came up recently in my campaign, but I read through this thread looking for confirmation of my own interpretation and didn't find it.
Per the PHB, all verbal components are spoken with pitch and resonance. These two words and their definitions are fundamental to understanding verbal components. I'm not sure how some people believe that the definition is somehow vague or something that the DM needs to interpret. The rules could not be more clear.
Firstly, pitch refers to the frequency of sound, or the tone of the voice, also referred to as the register and ranging between high or low tones. The human voice can not produce a pitch when whispering. Hence, all verbal components are spoken aloud. Secondly, resonance refers to the amplification, intensification, or echoing of the sound, depending on usage. While this is likely far short of shouting the mystical words needed to cast the spell, it is most certainly done with force or vocal fortitude of some sort.
In short, vocal components are spoken aloud, most likely with a slightly raised voice or using the speaker's body cavity to create a resonating sound.
Yeah, that is a more detailed version of what I said in comment 26.
Im wondering exactly what words or sounds are needed to cast the Teleport spell thats a 7th level spell?
Whatever you want? Maybe it's "Diagon Alley."
This was an interesting conversation. I actually came for a much different question on the verbal component. But before I get to that I'd like to add that I am relatively new to DnD so I'm no authority on this subject. I haven't seen any directions that says the verbal component must be spoken words that anyone else necessarily understands. for instance, a druid possibly using specific sounds of rushing wind to conjuring or become an air elemental. Stuff like that. Also, because nothing really says that hand gestures or material components have to be visible to anyone, I assumed that they could be done in pockets, behind something, under a table, etc., as long as they were used.
After reading this thread I'm wondering if casters are basically useless under water etc.
The reason I came here is because a very creative player at my table was grabbed tightly around the throat and lifted off the ground. He was rendered unable to speak. He thought for a bit and came up with the idea to use minor illusion which doesn't require a verbal component to make his verbal component. He argued that the sounds originate from him, his thought. No one knew what to do, but all agreed it was creative.