D&D 5E Deceptive Spellcasting

[abirdcall]

I have noticed people talking a lot about how they allow spellcasters to hide the casting of their spells and even not have their effects noticed even when they have a clear effect.

Most spells should be obvious. They are very powerful abilities, but their downside is that you can't be subtle about it.

The most common form of this is having a character whisper the Verbal components. They require "specific pitch and resonance" and as such should not be able to be whispered.

Somatic components "...include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures." You can't change the gestures of a spell just to make it more subtle.

Material components are again, pretty obvious.

Then there is the matter of people living in a world where spells exist. Most NPCs should be able to recognize a spell being cast. It is an important thing to learn about. Casting spells on other people should also be illegal. It is assault or worse.

 

[wedgeski]

Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.

Otherwise, Stealth, Performance, and Sleight of Hand checks are all available for the DM in these circumstances, naturally with some kind of penalty to the effectiveness of the spell on failure, or perhaps whatever happens (Disadvantage on attack rolls, opponent advantage on Saving Throws, etc.).

 

[abirdcall]

Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.

Otherwise, Stealth, Performance, and Sleight of Hand checks are all available for the DM in these circumstances, naturally with some kind of penalty to the effectiveness of the spell on failure, or perhaps whatever happens (Disadvantage on attack rolls, opponent advantage on Saving Throws, etc.).

And I think allowing that to happen is a huge buff for spellcasters that they don't need. It is also a nerf to Sorcerers. Subtle Spell should be a unique ability that only they get.

 

[wedgeski]

And I think allowing that to happen is a huge buff for spellcasters that they don't need. It is also a nerf to Sorcerers. Subtle Spell should be a unique ability that only they get.

Nah. Subtle spell gets the sorcerer out of a jail cell when he's bound and gagged. What I'm talking about is a risk/reward trade-off in difficult social situations (such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested).

 

[abirdcall]

Nah. Subtle spell gets the sorcerer out of a jail cell when he's bound and gagged. What I'm talking about is a risk/reward trade-off in difficult social situations (such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested).

That is reducing Subtle Spell to a very narrow application.

Spellcasting is anything but subtle. You can't whisper. The pitch, resonance, movements, etc. are all exact and specific.

Maybe in the situation you describe it should be the Rogue or Fighter that steps up and uses their skills for the party's benefit.

Magic is brute force. In a social situation you can cast a spell to compell people to do things, but there will be repercussions.

 

[KahlessNestor]

And yet it happens in the novels all the time. I'm not too worried about it.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[wedgeski]

That is reducing Subtle Spell to a very narrow application.

Spellcasting is anything but subtle. You can't whisper. The pitch, resonance, movements, etc. are all exact and specific.

Maybe in the situation you describe it should be the Rogue or Fighter that steps up and uses their skills for the party's benefit.

Magic is brute force. In a social situation you can cast a spell to compell people to do things, but there will be repercussions.

Eh, honestly I think that strips the game of potential drama for the very small cost of *slightly* reducing the Sorcerer's niche. Your reading of the spellcasting rules is reasonable, but not one by which I'd live or die.

 

[abirdcall]

Eh, honestly I think that strips the game of potential drama for the very small cost of *slightly* reducing the Sorcerer's niche. Your reading of the spellcasting rules is reasonable, but not one by which I'd live or die.

I feel like you haven't read my posts.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

How spellcasting works in this regard is entirely up to the group. The game works fine if one allows subtle spellcasting.

I just require a bluff or slight of hand check, and investigate or arcana to detect the spell in spite of the attempt to hide it.

 

[jaelis]

Lots of ways you can play the game. If your group is having fun you're doing it right. If someone else is having fun playing differently, they are doing it right too.