D&D 5E Hacking Metamagic

[Riley37]

Could there be a metamagic of Hacking?

For example, when someone casts Message or Sending, the recipient knows who sent them a message.
How about a Sending with falsified header information? Sorcerer Able (who is also Wizard 5 or Cleric 5, since Sending is not on the Sorceror list) casts Sending to Paladin Bob, but Paladin Bob thinks that the message came from High Priest Charles; Bob's 25-word return message goes to Sorceror Able.... possibly including information which Bob would not have knowingly revealed to Able.

What are some other spells which implicitly convey information, which could be falsified?

If the caster of Detect Thought chooses to probe deeper than surface thoughts, "the target knows that you are probing into its mind". But how much does the target learn, about who you are? Especially without line-of-sight and without previous contact? However much information the target gets, that information could be hackable.

The subject of a Raise Dead spell knows who cast Raise Dead, and that might affect the subject's decision whether to return to the body. Sorceror 3 with Hacking metamagic, plus 9 levels in Cleric: hack the "header information" so that the subject thinks their own religion's high priest is raising them. However, afterlife and the gods are subject to setting-specific rules; in a setting which includes Kelemvor, I'd rule that Kelemvor has countermeasures against misinformation.

Dominate Person and Monster allow mental control, but do not specify that the target necessarily learns anything from the telepathic connection. Crown of Madness causes the target to be "charmed by you", so it can't attack you, but does it learn who you are, if it never sees you? (For example, if the target is blind or blindfolded, or you're under Greater Invisibility.)

 

[fuindordm]

Cool idea, but it doesn't sound like something a PC would likely choose. It makes a good story element for an adventure, though! Maybe something that an alienist sorcerer would have.

 

[delericho]

Could there be a metamagic of Hacking?

That's a cool idea, but I think I'd be inclined to make it a category of spells, rather than a form of metamagic (so the Wizard casts false sending rather than the Sorcerer casts sending with Hacked metamagic applied).

My primary reason for this being that it (usually) leaves a paper trail - the PCs find the Wizard's spellbook, or they find some scrolls with these spells on, or something. That would seem a better way to hook in to an adventure rather than having seemingly-bizarre things occur with no real way for the PCs to detect them.

 

[Riley37]

seemingly-bizarre things occur with no real way for the PCs to detect them.

Good point. Also, that brings up a larger topic: whether players and PCs can reasonably believe that they know *all the options*, that is, every spell which exists. PCs learn Arcana; players can read rulesbooks. Do you prefer a setting in which PCs know the list of all the possible spells, or a setting in which there's always the possibility of something unknown and unexpected?

I like the idea of a False Sending spell - maybe level 4, since Sending is level 3?

Maybe also a False Message, but the jump from cantrip to Level 1 is larger IMO.

 

[lumenbeing]

I like your idea! Hacking the "header" is a cool concept.
How about a DDOS flavored meta magic? Spend a sorcery point to interrupt another caster's access to the weave if you land a spell attack on them. It would be, in effect like Silence, but not actually silence them, and it would only last until the end of your next turn.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Do you prefer a setting in which PCs know the list of all the possible spells, or a setting in which there's always the possibility of something unknown and unexpected?

As a player, I could buy into the existence of a new spell much more easily than I could buy into the idea that someone is breaking the unalterable rules of how a given spell actually works.

Adding content - spells, races, classes, etc - is one level of world design, but adding the ability to alter existing spells is another matter entirely. Although, to be honest, I'm not really a big fan of the existing methods for how sorcerers can do that sort of thing; as long as you made it clear to the players that this is a thing which exists within the world, it wouldn't be the end of the world.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Metamagic is awful as it stands, because it's used by one class that is primarily characterized by something else (ie - wild magic, dragon magic). To most of my players, a sorceror is a spellcaster who is fundamentally changed by the energy they wield, not someone who fine-tunes spells.

If you want to make "changing spells" a thing, it's probably much better done by adding spells to the spellbook or by creating a new application of the arcana skill.

My own preference would be to create some sort of one-off ritual to achieve the specific goal, which is more representative of how hacking works and lines up more with how I view magic to work. Bob has a spell called 'sending', and it does what the rules say... but Bob had to work hard to create it, and it's uniquely identifiable as Bob's sending in the way that it works, which is why you know that Bob has sent the sending.

If you want to hijack that, then you need to replicate Bob's sending spell. And that probably takes more than just knowing that his name is Bob, at least if you want to send something to someone who's previously been contacted by Bob. It probably requires some intimate knowledge of Bob and Bob's spellcasting.

OTOH, if you want to falsify a Bob's sending to someone who never has been contacted by Bob, it might be much easier. But if Bob later contacts them with sending, they'll be able to tell it's a different Bob.

 

[Jester David]

Sounds like a spell with a casting time of "reaction". Eavesdrop might be a good name. It might work on spells of a lower level, so you pick what level you think the caster is using for the communication magic. Might also work on scry and the like.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Good point. Also, that brings up a larger topic: whether players and PCs can reasonably believe that they know *all the options*, that is, every spell which exists. PCs learn Arcana; players can read rulesbooks. Do you prefer a setting in which PCs know the list of all the possible spells, or a setting in which there's always the possibility of something unknown and unexpected?

Me, I prefer a setting with open-ended magic and monsters. That's why I allow spell research and that's why I encouraged my players to read the Book of Lost Spells for ideas.

 

[delericho]

Good point. Also, that brings up a larger topic: whether players and PCs can reasonably believe that they know *all the options*, that is, every spell which exists. PCs learn Arcana; players can read rulesbooks. Do you prefer a setting in which PCs know the list of all the possible spells, or a setting in which there's always the possibility of something unknown and unexpected?

I prefer a world where the PHB provides the list of 'common' spells that PCs can be assumed to know about, but where there is always the possibility of other spells that they don't. Pre-5e, those other spells would largely be taken from supplements to the game. In the new light-release-schedule days, they're more likely to come from 3pp materials, converted material from old editions, or just new spells I've made up myself.