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

[Satyrn]

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.

I like this as a possibility, something to consider. I've filed it away in my memory.

 

[FrogReaver]

I'd rather call it an opportunity to generate interesting plot twists.

You can do that by just saying enchantment spells work different in my game. No need to attempt to justify with rules what cannot be justified with rules.

 

[Lehrbuch]

As for Concentration that's a judgement call. Personally I see it as concentrating to keep a spell in place - whether a target shrugged the effect off is immaterial to that...

I think of it as like concentrating while playing a video game. If it hasn't loaded, you are not going to concentrate on the game.

 

[Uchawi]

I can see it go either way, but agree on trying to be consistent. Even if a player knows how much damage they have done, does not mean a creature takes all of it. They may succeed on a skill roll and still not know if they failed. With a regular charm, you may not know if the creature is affected, so I don't see concentration changing that with suggestion. Most players just keep concentration up until they want to do the next things or it is cancelled by damage, etc.

 

[5ekyu]

Adding to previous, in my experience players tend to shy away from less concrete result resource spends and things with a lot of GM flux potential as a matter of course and this is the kind of thing that just reinforces to them to do that. This will likely result 99% of the in-game. Enchantment uses that arent lockdowns being GM used in addition to creating a whole lot of "but if..." Questions.

A GM has a gazillion ways to create or generate interesting plot twists without twisting the limited resources of the PC into self-inflicted booby ttaps.


Sent from my VS995 using EN World mobile app

 

[Sword of Spirit]

It sounds to me like the most accurate interpretation of the books would be that a caster doesn't know if the target made their save unless the spell specifically says so (ie, zone of truth) or if concentration is required.

It actually makes things interesting.

 

[FrogReaver]

It sounds to me like the most accurate interpretation of the books would be that a caster doesn't know if the target made their save unless the spell specifically says so (ie, zone of truth) or if concentration is required.

It actually makes things interesting.

You going to be having your players make concentration checks on spells that all the enemies have saved against as well?

 

[Saeviomagy]

It sounds to me like the most accurate interpretation of the books would be that a caster doesn't know if the target made their save unless the spell specifically says so (ie, zone of truth) or if concentration is required.

Actually, the spellcasting rules say that the effect of passing a save is described by the spell. Suggestion says "On a failed save, it pursues the course of action you described to the best of its ability."

It also specifies some conditions where the spell ends - when you or your companions attack the target, when the duration is up, when concentration lapses, or when the task is complete...

But not when the save is made.

Charm person is much the same: the target is charmed if it failed it's save, but the spell does not end.

That's in contrast with some spells such as charm person:
"The target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or be paralyzed for the duration. At the end of each of its turns, the target can make another Wisdom saving throw. On a success, the spell ends on the target."

So it seems to me that the caster doesn't strictly know if their spells have been successful for some of the more subtle spells.

I would suggest that succesfully fooling a caster would require you to:
a) know the spell being cast
b) know or correctly guess the intended result (ie - you could fake a dominate if you correctly guess what you're going to be ordered to do)
c) make a cha(deception) roll, probably with a penalty because this is more difficult than if you had time to line up your performance ahead of time

 

[FrogReaver]

Actually, the spellcasting rules say that the effect of passing a save is described by the spell. Suggestion says "On a failed save, it pursues the course of action you described to the best of its ability."

It also specifies some conditions where the spell ends - when you or your companions attack the target, when the duration is up, when concentration lapses, or when the task is complete...

But not when the save is made.

Charm person is much the same: the target is charmed if it failed it's save, but the spell does not end.

That's in contrast with some spells such as charm person:
"The target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or be paralyzed for the duration. At the end of each of its turns, the target can make another Wisdom saving throw. On a success, the spell ends on the target."

So it seems to me that the caster doesn't strictly know if their spells have been successful for some of the more subtle spells.

I would suggest that succesfully fooling a caster would require you to:
a) know the spell being cast
b) know or correctly guess the intended result (ie - you could fake a dominate if you correctly guess what you're going to be ordered to do)
c) make a cha(deception) roll, probably with a penalty because this is more difficult than if you had time to line up your performance ahead of time

Wow.... the only spells that say the spell ends on the target are the ones that can affect more than one target at a time. That's why it's there. To show you can continue concentrating on the spell even when one enemy passes the spell. That's why it doesn't say the spell ends there as well, because it doesn't because you still have other targets the concentration part effects.

 

[FrogReaver]

Can we go ahead and get this nipped in the bud before it spirals out of control and confuses way to many of yall. Let's get someone to tweet JC and ask if you can continue concentrating on a spell that's targeting a single enemy even after the enemy passed it's save? Maybe use faerie fire as an example?