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

Sword of Spirit · Nov 19, 2017

I know the clarifications about knowing whether you were yourself affected by a spell, but I can't find information on whether the caster of a spell knows if the target makes their save or not.

The specific situation that brought this up was a suggestion spell where it wouldn't be obvious to the caster whether or not the target had been affected. I ruled that the caster knows (because it was a PC and I temporarily rule in PC favor when in doubt), but I'm not at all sure that is correct.

Zone of truth specifically says that the caster knows, which implies that the caster doesn't normally know.

Has there been a clarification that I'm unaware of?

MostlyHarmless42 · Nov 19, 2017

Unless it specifies in the spell or ability, it is 100% the DM'S call in this matter. Just make sure they are consistent with their rulings for both NPCS and Players (barring extenuating circumstances).

...that said, this comes with one caveat: spell compnents.

According to the spell casting rules (at least as intended), spell casting in general is an obvious act in some way, even to the common laymen. Sells with somatic components use strange gestures that are not normally done, material components involve weird items like bat guano being used, or at the very least an obvious "magical thingy" (wand, orb, staff, ring, amulet, or other focus) being both touched and out in an obvious fashion to use a spell, and verbal components (even "sneaky" spells like suggestion) all use obviously magical language. It is intended to be VERY obvious they are casting *something* to anyone watching/listening, even common folk. The question is whether or not they know *what* you are casting; suspicious guards may mistake your healing spell for a fireball if you aren't careful.

All of this the DM is welcome to rule otherwise, though if he does, at minimum it should require a skill check (deception maybe), and likely even then a chance the spell fails or has some mishap because you trying to cast it on the sly is altering the "formula" of the spell, which is the intended purpose of sorcerer metamagic and the Subtle Spell ability.

Hope that helps.

FrogReaver · Nov 19, 2017

Sword of Spirit said:
I know the clarifications about knowing whether you were yourself affected by a spell, but I can't find information on whether the caster of a spell knows if the target makes their save or not.

The specific situation that brought this up was a suggestion spell where it wouldn't be obvious to the caster whether or not the target had been affected. I ruled that the caster knows (because it was a PC and I temporarily rule in PC favor when in doubt), but I'm not at all sure that is correct.

Zone of truth specifically says that the caster knows, which implies that the caster doesn't normally know.

Has there been a clarification that I'm unaware of?

The Concentration Mechanic.

I find it a hard sale to say that you are unaware you are concentrating on the spell after you attempted to cast it. If you concentrated on it then you were successful. If you didn't then you weren't.

By that same reasoning the caster could also determine when the subject actually completed the suggestion you made.

FrogReaver · Nov 19, 2017

MostlyHarmless42 said:
Unless it specifies in the spell or ability, it is 100% the DM'S call in this matter. Just make sure they are consistent with their rulings for both NPCS and Players (barring extenuating circumstances).

...that said, this comes with one caveat: spell compnents.

According to the spell casting rules (at least as intended), spell casting in general is an obvious act in some way, even to the common laymen. Sells with somatic components use strange gestures that are not normally done, material components involve weird items like bat guano being used, or at the very least an obvious "magical thingy" (wand, orb, staff, ring, amulet, or other focus) being both touched and out in an obvious fashion to use a spell, and verbal components (even "sneaky" spells like suggestion) all use obviously magical language. It is intended to be VERY obvious they are casting *something* to anyone watching/listening, even common folk. The question is whether or not they know *what* you are casting; suspicious guards may mistake your healing spell for a fireball if you aren't careful.

All of this the DM is welcome to rule otherwise, though if he does, at minimum it should require a skill check (deception maybe), and likely even then a chance the spell fails or has some mishap because you trying to cast it on the sly is altering the "formula" of the spell, which is the intended purpose of sorcerer metamagic and the Subtle Spell ability.

Hope that helps.

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.

Lehrbuch · Nov 19, 2017

Sword of Spirit said:
...I can't find information on whether the caster of a spell knows if the target makes their save or not.

The specific situation that brought this up was a suggestion spell ...Zone of truth specifically says that the caster knows

I agree with [MENTION=6795602]FrogReaver[/MENTION], Suggestion has Concentration duration, so the caster will know whether she is concentrating or not. Possibly, it might not be too clear to the caster whether the spell has fizzled because she lost concentration almost straight away or because the target made his save. However, either way she knows her spell didn't work.

For other spells I just rule on a case-by-case basis, depending on what the spell does and what the caster should be aware of. For example, she does not know whether a target has made his save against a Fireball spell. But, if she can see the target, she does know that a target has made his save against a Web spell (because he is not caught in the web).

And, of course, "made his save" is player jargon. The PC will interpret the save as something like "resisting" or "dodging" the effect depending on the specific effect considered.

Charlaquin · Nov 19, 2017

Lehrbuch said:
For example, she does not know whether a target has made his save against a Fireball spell.

I disagree. I think anything with a Dexterity save should be obvious whether someone has succeeded or not, because a Dexterity save represents a reflexive physical action taken to avoid or reduce the effects of a spell. In the example, fireball, the creature making the save is ducking, or holding up a shield, or stopping, dropping, and rolling, or otherwise taking physical action to minimize how badly they are harmed by the fire. I think the difference between failing in such an action and succeeding in it would be quite visibly evident.

Kurotowa · Nov 19, 2017

I subscribe to the philosophy that game mechanics are player abstractions for the actions and events of the game. The target of a Fireball doesn't just stand there as the flames wash over them and happily announce "Made my save!" That Dex save means they're agilely throwing themselves to the side or behind a stray piece of cover just before the explosion hits, which is obvious to all involved.

Now, mental effects can be a bit less clear, especially when it's meant to be subtle even if it works. Generally I'd default to anything with a duration giving the caster a clear sense of if it took or not, even without concentration. For most other things there's the old standby of "their eyes briefly glaze over before they snap out of it with a start" descriptions.

Of course, there are always edge cases. If someone wants to make a Deception check to pretend they failed their save to a mental effect, that's also a classic. But on the whole I lean towards transparency in action results. It's the same principle where martial PCs should always be able to instantly recognize when they're hitting something with damage resistance.

Nevvur · Nov 19, 2017

Agreed with others, per the concentration mechanic.

Interestingly, other NPCs wouldn't necessarily know whether or not a creature made the save. For instance, if you cast Mass Suggestion and tell an angry mob of peasants to disperse, the people who failed their saves are going to leave, but then you might have a few people who leave because they see others leaving, or because they realize they're facing a spellcaster, not because they failed their own saves.

Zippee · Nov 19, 2017

Kurotowa said:
I subscribe to the philosophy that game mechanics are player abstractions for the actions and events of the game. The target of a Fireball doesn't just stand there as the flames wash over them and happily announce "Made my save!" That Dex save means they're agilely throwing themselves to the side or behind a stray piece of cover just before the explosion hits, which is obvious to all involved..

Whilst I agree with this, all affected creatures get to make a saving throw, not just the successful ones. So all creatures are attempting to roll under the effect, dodge round a corner, tip a table up, etc. Being unsuccessful on your save doesn't imply you stood rooted to the spot gaping in awe, it means the action you took was insufficient to reduce damage. So I don't really see why a caster would necessarily know that creature A made it's save, whilst creature B failed. Narratively it could be obvious or the effect may make it obvious but the mechanic doesn't necessarily imply that it is obvious.

Lehrbuch · Nov 19, 2017

Charlaquin said:
I disagree. I think anything with a Dexterity save should be obvious whether someone has succeeded or not, because a Dexterity save represents a reflexive physical action taken to avoid or reduce the effects of a spell. In the example, fireball, the creature making the save is ducking, or holding up a shield, or stopping, dropping, and rolling, or otherwise taking physical action to minimize how badly they are harmed by the fire. I think the difference between failing in such an action and succeeding in it would be quite visibly evident.

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.

So, in the split second that a fireball engulfs the target I think that it will normally be really difficult for the caster to distinguish between people who are successfully jumping out the way and thus take only a proportion of the damage, and those who try to jump out of the way, but nonetheless take full damage. The best the caster can do is be aware of who is standing afterwards; but targets who make the save can still be killed by the fireball and targets who fail the save can still survive it.