Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="evilbob" data-source="post: 3438060" data-attributes="member: 9789">The logic of this question is quite puzzling, and it seems as though a good case can be made for either side.On one hand, you've got that for most spells, even ones with saving throws, the caster doesn't know if it the save was made.  It would follow that targeted spells with a saving throw seem more like an exception, rather than a rule.  Therefore, the caster shouldn't know.On the other hand, you've got that a spell without a saving throw is should be more powerful than a spell with a saving throw.  It seems wrong to penalize a spell without a saving throw and not allow the caster to know if it works, since if it only -had- a saving throw (and thus was a weaker spell) then the caster would know.  (This seems similar to the "should harm cause massive damage checks" argument.)  In this case, it seems wrong to penalize a spell for not having a saving throw, so the caster should know.On the other, other hand, it seems clear that the sort of flavor and intent behind the spell is to just fling off a message to someone, not to be able to detect if someone is alive or know any of the other information a caster would know if he knew whether or not the spell worked.  So, based on the flavor and apparent intent, the caster should not know.If anyone else is reminded of Vizzini at this point, you're not alone.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />A 4th level spell (scrying) and a zero-level spell (message) can accomplish just as much as this one 5th level spell - albeit with a saving throw that you would know failed - and you'd certainly know if it worked, which means a 4th level spell would effectively tell you more.  A 5th level spell shouldn't be trumped by a 4th level spell, so the caster should know.However, several higher levels spells - legend lore, for example - seem more suited and better designed to divining information about a subject that could technically be gleaned by a caster of sending, albeit with a much more detailed response.  Upper level spells shouldn't be trumped by 5th level spells, so the caster shouldn't know.Nothing is listed in the spell's description to indicate that the caster should "know" if his message is received or not.  Therefore, he shouldn't know.  However, nothing specifically is stated in other targeted spells with no spell resistance and no saving throws (for example, discern location) that they should know if their spell worked, and there's really nothing keeping you from knowing whether or not those kinds of spells worked or not, so it doesn't necessarily mean that the spell's description has to include something of that nature.  Therefore, the caster should know.*pant pant*I hope I've tricked someone into revealing something at this point, because otherwise I'm still completely unsure myself as to which side this should come down on.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification