D&D 5E Does the caster know if a spell target makes their save?

FrogReaver said:

Suggestion only requires verbal and material components. No somatic gestures are required. A spell casting focus gets rid of having to pull out the components. If the Verbal part of the spell really gives it away then as you mentioned subtle spell would solve that.

Personally I see the verbal component of this spell being more like the jedi mind trick in star wars. Nothing really more than an assertive phrase consisting of what you want the NPC to do.

Click to expand...

I was referring to magic in general, not just suggestion. The rules as intended behind spellcasting is that they should be obvious. It is the point of subtle spell existing as an ability to allow on the sly casting (as I said in my first post). As far as verbal components go, you can rule it as if Jedi mind trick, but even then it's still an obvious command word being spoken out loud to anyone else observing. In the case of literal Jedi Mind trick, they use an obvious somatic hand gesture as well (albeit suggestion as you said has no somatic). In the case of material, yes, a focus will replace the material but that just it, you still have to HOLD it openly.

Want to know whats the first thing I order my Guards to do as a noble lord in a world were magic actually exists? Give them standing orders to attack anyone waving or pointing a wand/stick/orb/weird "magic thingy" around in my presence unless I say otherwise. Doubly so if I or they can't tell the difference between a healing spell or a fireball. The scene with Theodan in Lord of the Rings is a prime example of this, albeit Gandalf helps him out. He only succeeds because his guards disobey a direct order to not take his staff away.

Albeit, animals and less intelligent creatures are likely easier to fool in this regard.

The point I was making in regards to the original post is that the intended rules are that when a spell is cast (short of using subtle spell or an appropriate componentless spell) any creature of at least moderate intelligence knows that the creature cast something. Not what spell that is, or who make what save or what not (albeit I always rule a caster knows if a save succeeds or not), etc.

Lehrbuch said:

A character who attempts a Dexterity Save but fails is still ducking and rolling, etc. --- just not very effectively. Crucially, a character who makes the Dexterity Save still takes damage. So, he still ends up charred.

Click to expand...

Right. Maybe the girl who failed her save was slow to react and only half way to cover when the Fireball detonates. Maybe that warrior was caught up in his sword fight and didn't notice the spell at all until the flames washed over him.

IMO translating game mechanics into those sorts of narratives is an important part of the game, and should be a clear information channel for the players as to what their characters are experiencing.

With regards to the concentration factor that people have been discussing, I ask this: does concentration happen automatically if your target(s) fail their save, or does it go more like this?

Player: "I cast suggestion and suggest 'This fight is pointless. Leave now.' Make a will save."

DM: *roll die behind a screen* "Okay"

Player: "Did they make their save?"

DM: "You don't know. They haven't had a chance to act on it yet."

Player: "Is my concentration being consumed?"

DM: "That's up to you, do you maintain concentration on the spell?"

Depends on the campaign style I suppose.
For simplicity sake, yes, the magic user would/should know, and could tell by the reaction of both the failure of their magic, and
potentially the reaction(usually hostile) of the NPC.
In an Intrigue/Socially Political game where hiding intentions may be a larger part of the game, perhaps not.
Cast the spell, Concentrate on it for the duration and look for signs of Deception from the target while
you direct the spell and the target.

DM descriptions to players for making saves..
Strength: Catches the item(weight issue), Holds onto the cliff side (item/location)
Dex: avoids the worst, or all of the Fireball, Lands on his feet with aplomb
Con: doesn't start puking, or keels over from whatever effect they were subjected to.
Int: Cloudyness in the eyes a little, like they were drunk perhaps or daydreaming?
Wis: Similar to the above, but perhaps also maybe a little more talkative?
Cha: Might get socially aggressive or paranoid over something
Basically the three physical stats would show reactions along their respective descriptors,
while the mental stats could show signs both physical and mental.

Phazonfish said:

With regards to the concentration factor that people have been discussing, I ask this: does concentration happen automatically if your target(s) fail their save, or does it go more like this?

Player: "I cast suggestion and suggest 'This fight is pointless. Leave now.' Make a will save."

DM: *roll die behind a screen* "Okay"

Player: "Did they make their save?"

DM: "You don't know. They haven't had a chance to act on it yet."

Player: "Is my concentration being consumed?"

DM: "That's up to you, do you maintain concentration on the spell?"

Click to expand...

Are you trying to imply it's okay for the DM to use crafty words and evasive answers to answer a players direct question about something their character would know they are doing in the game world?

If the player says yes and their was no concentration has the DM just tricked him into not casting another concentration spell for the rest of the day?

FrogReaver said:

Are you trying to imply it's okay for the DM to use crafty words and evasive answers to answer a players direct question about something their character would know they are doing in the game world?

If the player says yes and their was no concentration has the DM just tricked him into not casting another concentration spell for the rest of the day?

Click to expand...

My apologies if my post was worded unintuitively, it was just the first way it came to mind. With regards to your first question, no, I am saying some DMs may rule that you have to decide whether or not you are concentrating even if you do not know if your spell has taken root; I would not rule as such because it sounds unfun, but I would not hold it against a DM if they pulled that on me because it makes sense from a certain perspective, especially since I was responding to talk of how to use the concentration mechanic to gain more knowledge than you should have.

With regards to your second question, no, in that case the DM has just tricked him into not casting another concentration spell until he changes his mind on whether or not he wants to continue concentrating and can choose to cease doing so at any time; this time will likely come up within a round or two after it becomes obvious that the target is not listening to your suggestion.

Phazonfish said:

My apologies if my post was worded unintuitively, it was just the first way it came to mind. With regards to your first question, no, I am saying some DMs may rule that you have to decide whether or not you are concentrating even if you do not know if your spell has taken root; I would not rule as such because it sounds unfun, but I would not hold it against a DM if they pulled that on me because it makes sense from a certain perspective, especially since I was responding to talk of how to use the concentration mechanic to gain more knowledge than you should have.

Click to expand...

There is no way they can within the rules. Of course in 5e rulings over rules and all....

But the only rules rebuttal that needs given to such an attempted rules lawyering assertion by a DM is: it's literally impossible to concentrate on a spell that failed. The spell either succeeded or failed when the monster attempted it's saving throw. As such there's nothing for me to decide. Either I am concentrating on the spell or I am not.

With regards to your second question, no, in that case the DM has just tricked him into not casting another concentration spell until he changes his mind on whether or not he wants to continue concentrating and can choose to cease doing so at any time; this time will likely come up within a round or two after it becomes obvious that the target is not listening to your suggestion.

Click to expand...

Sorry. DM shouldn't be using out of game trickery to cause players to not cast spells. That would be an example of a bad DM.

FrogReaver said:

There is no way they can within the rules. Of course in 5e rulings over rules and all....

But the only rules rebuttal that needs given to such an attempted rules lawyering assertion by a DM is: it's literally impossible to concentrate on a spell that failed. The spell either succeeded or failed when the monster attempted it's saving throw. As such there's nothing for me to decide. Either I am concentrating on the spell or I am not.

Click to expand...

As I said, I would not rule as such, but I believe it could be argued that the target making their save does not end the spell, it just causes the spell not to do anything. As such, there is still a spell to concentrate on, it is just not a spell of any use. Since the spell would be useless at the point it would be sensible to drop it, but you don't know such until you are sure the target failed their save.

FrogReaver said:

Sorry. DM shouldn't be using out of game trickery to cause players to not cast spells. That would be an example of a bad DM.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand, in what regard is said trickery "out of game"?

Phazonfish said:

As I said, I would not rule as such, but I believe it could be argued that the target making their save does not end the spell, it just causes the spell not to do anything. As such, there is still a spell to concentrate on, it is just not a spell of any use. Since the spell would be useless at the point it would be sensible to drop it, but you don't know such until you are sure the target failed their save.

Click to expand...

That makes more sense. Thank you. Strangely no one plays that way and it can easily be illustrated. Even the guy trying to rules lawyer suggestion into something he can control a little easier wouldn't have been doing that till suggestion was cast. When a caster casts a spell and the targets all save against it and then he is damaged does he roll a constituation saving throw to determine if he keeps concentrating on it. That never happens.

I'm not sure I understand, in what regard is said trickery "out of game"?

Click to expand...

With your above clarification it may not be trickery.

I do kinda like the interpretation where you don't know if enchantment spells take hold, because it opens the possibility of acting like you are under the caster's control, which sounds like it could be fun when it favors the players.