is this a valid tactic for shutting down a caster

[Innocent Bystander]

In a game I was in, we used this tactic on a dragon. We still ended up getting wiped out*, but at least it ended up being a close one.

*We were all new to 3ed and CR/ECL and got put up against dragon that was way beyond our abilities. Still a lot of fun though.

 

[gnfnrf]

You don't threaten while casting, and since the enemy's casting was the trigger, when the cleric's readied casting occurs, the enemy does not threaten.

Huh? Why not, assuming you have a weapon in your other hand?

--
gnfnrf

 

[Old Drew Id]

Effective method I have seen in game, improvement on the arrow trick:

Get a small glass bottle
+
Fill it with sand
+
Cast Silence on one of the grains of sand on the top
+
Cork the bottle, thus blocking line of effect
=
Silence Grenade, usable by any member of the party

Keep the grenade on your belt, ready to throw, or give it to the party fighter. Throw the grenade at the enemy caster as a readied action, aiming for the ground at his feet. It shatters, and the silence covers him. He has to leave the area, unless he can figure out which grain of sand is the magical one.

 

[irdeggman]

Huh? Why not, assuming you have a weapon in your other hand?

--
gnfnrf

Because that is what the rules say.

You only provoke attacks of opportunity when you begin casting a spell, even though you might continue casting for at least one full round. While casting a spell, you don’t threaten any squares around you.

If you think about it you must concentrate to cast a spell (hence the reason that you generate an AoO in the first place). If you are concentratin so much on casting that you leave an opening for someone to make an AoO then why should you be able to make an AoO when so "distracted"?

But anyone else who threatens the square could make an AoO even if the spel caster could not.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

I think this thread has convinced me to implement a house rule nerfing Silence.

But, what should the house rule be?

1) magic words are more powerful than normal words and can be spoken in a silenced area if the caster makes a will save

2) casting a spell in a silenced area ruins the spell and consumes the silence spell

3) the silence spell only imposes the penalties associated with deafness (20% spell failure chance I think) on spellcasting

4) silence spell must be cast on a person, not an object or point in space


Anyone like any of these as house rules? Or have a better one to suggest?

Ken

 

[Lord Zardoz]

I do not think that a house rule specific to the spell is really required here. Clever players can work around it pretty easily. All you need to do is remember that the spell is an emanation effect. All that you need to do is break the line of effect, which can be done pretty easily. All you need to do is get in the 'shadow' of something that can break the line of effect. The only time this is going to be nearly impossible is if the effect is centered on yourself.

The only time the spell can become problematic is if the spell ends up centered on your spell caster in such a way that they cannot get away from it. If it is directly centered, you do get a Will Save, which is pretty easy for most casters. If it is centered on an object and then attached to the caster (tanglefoot bag / barbed arrow), that gets more problematic. I would be very careful about allowing that kind of use, since it is essentially an attempt to center it on a caster without granting the benefit of a Will save.

I think the most tactically useful way to achieve this effect is to center it on a melee attacker, and then to have that attacker make an effort to stay near the caster. This is dangerously effective, but can still be worked around. The caster will at worst have to eat an AoO for movement, but he can still move away then cast.

The best on the spot counter to a Silence spell is a potion of Invisibility. The best general counter would be a Silent Dispel Magic. The Silent spell is not a very sexy feat, but it is the best option to deal with this.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

counters

Lord Zardoz, I like your suggestion of a potion of invisibility as a counter. Of course this only works against a caster who doesn't have See Invisibility up, or Invisibility Purge.

I think, though, that you've missed something in this discussion, which is the power of the readied action combined with the silence spell.

You mention the caster avoiding the effects by moving out of the silenced area before casting, right? The thing is, this is impossible if the person casting Silence employs the right strategy..that of readying an action to cast silence when the opposing spellcaster begins to cast a spell.

IE, the sequence is this:

silence caster wins initiative, or survives the opposing spellcaster's first action

silence caster readies an action to cast silence on the ground at the feet of the opposing spellcaster when he begins to cast a spell.

opposing spellcaster begins to cast a spell, which is ruined, unless he has silent spell

silence caster re-readies the same identical action

ad infinitum

With this strategy, a 6th level beguiler can shut down a lich, assuming that the lich doesn't have silent spell. OK, the lich can probably beat the beguiler in melee, but forcing a lich to engage in melee is still a huge tactical win.

Do you disagree? What am I missing?

Ken

 

[werk]

Isn't it an illusion(glamer) spell?

Assuming that the caster would be able to identify that there is a silence in effect, as opposed to being suddenly struck deaf, wouldn't they get an opportunity to disbelieve it?

Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief)
Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.

A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.

A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw.

It still wouldn't be a get out of jail free card for this technique, but it definitely throws a wrench in the gears.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

silence

Yes, it is an Illusion (Glamer) spell.

However, unlike most Illusion (Glamer) spells, it does not have a Will Disbelief saving throw listed. Rather, it is listed as

Saving Throw: Will negates; see text or none (object)


In my example above, the spell is being cast on an object.

I admit that I'm not an expert on illusion spells, but I believe that you only get a will save to disbelieve one when a Will Disbelief save is specifically noted in the spell header. Am I wrong?

Ken

 

[Artoomis]

Isn't it an illusion(glamer) spell?

Yes

Assuming that the caster would be able to identify that there is a silence in effect, as opposed to being suddenly struck deaf, wouldn't they get an opportunity to disbelieve it?

No. It's not "encountering an illusion." The "silence" is quite real, despite the fact that it is cast as an "illusion(glamer)" spell.

If this disbelief worked, than it would also work for Invisibility and possibly other spells as well where we know it does not work.

For "disbelief" to work, the spell must have "Saving Throw: None or Will disbelief (if interacted with); see text " or some similar entry in the spell description.

Yes, "Silence" can be tricky to overcome is used cleverly, but that's just part of the game and is not a real problem. Heck, it's far easier to overcome a Silence spell than to fight an "Improved Invisible, Flying" spell caster.