How to fix the Silence Spell?

[Gansk]

I'm tired of silence being used as the perfect counterspell. I don't mind the other uses of the spell, so I don't want to ban it. I've read as many threads as possible on this subject, and I would like your opinion on the best way to fix the spell.

I know a lot of people aren't bothered by the spell and think that it is fine as-is. I'm really more interested in how people who are bothered by the spell have fixed it in their campaigns.

 

[ZuulMoG]

Have NPC spellcasters take a metamagic feat (maybe... Silent Spell?) and memorize one or two Silent spells. It doesn't have to be every single one to nerf Silence altogether, but prudence dictates that a sensible cleric or wizard ALWAYS memorize one Silent Dispel and one Silent Greater Dispel, and maybe even a Silent Disjunction (when they get 10th level slots). It's simply too obvious a precaution for a sensible (Int 18+) or wise (Wis 18+) foe to take. You can bet the PCs do it. What's good for the gander is good for the goose. And anyway, why aren't PC spellcasters getting their own castings Silenced?

 

[Agamon]

Honestly, I have more of a problem with the grappling rules than the Silence spell, though
Silence can be problematic, for sure.

 

[the Jester]

I can't recall a single instance of silence being cast in several years imc.

 

[dedicated]

Yeah, in 3 years of gaming my group only used silence once (to allow my noisy cleric to sneak around a noblemans house and steal some gems to use raise dead)

And why do you think it's the perfect counterspell

 

[Nifft]

The PCs in my campaign use silence more for stealth than tactical countermagic.

-- N

 

[The Souljourner]

The problem with silence is Area: 20-ft.-radius emanation centered on a creature, object, or point in space.

Any spellcaster with a modicum of intelligence has probably encountered Silence before, and will just walk out of the area of effect.

If you cast it *on* someone, they do get a will save, and most caster types have decent will saves.

Sure, if there's no way out, then the caster is in trouble, but like others have said, you just need to remember to always memorize a silent dispel (or get a silent metamagic rod).

I think it would help if you explained exactly why and how Silence is becoming a problem in your campaign, and then we might be able to help. Obviously most of us haven't had any problems with the spell.

-The Souljourner

 

[Gansk]

I think it would help if you explained exactly why and how Silence is becoming a problem in your campaign, and then we might be able to help. Obviously most of us haven't had any problems with the spell.

-The Souljourner

Per RAW, if you ready an action to cast Silence in the spellcaster's general area when he or she attempts a spell with a verbal component (which is 95% of all spells), the spellcaster gets no save or SR and the spell is ruined automatically. No spellcraft check, no dispel magic check, no nothing.

Of course I could just metagame that all spellcasters are aware of this and give them all Silent Spell feats and metamagic items, but I would rather make counterspell a more viable tactic for both the PC's and the NPC's.

I typically use published modules, where most of the NPC spellcasters are not tweaked for countering this tactic. Why should I take the time to tweak them when I could just even the playing field with a small fix?

The other common reason to leave the Silence spell as-is is to say, "The spellcaster just moves out of the silence next round." That is easier said than done in a dungeon environment. Then the PC's use the following tactics to make it harder - a druid wildshaped into a bear with improved grab, the druid's bear animal companion, Grease spells, Glitterdust spells, Stinking Clouds, Evard's Black Tentacles, Spike Stones.

Can I do it to them? Sure. But once again I have to tweak NPC's to copy the exact same tactics when I would rather try to optimize their tactics with the spells that they have. I guess I would rather have a world where not every spellcaster duel revolved around casting and countering Silence.

Anybody who takes the time to search both the D&D Rules and House Rules forums will see that I am not the only one who feels that Silence is too powerful as a counterspell.

 

[KingOfChaos]

Actually, I would make it like they did Hold Person. Grant the creature struck with it a will save every round to negate the effects of the spell.

 

[The Souljourner]

Ok, lemme ignore the fact that I don't think it's all that bad, and let's take a look at your solutions:

Make Silence a full round action. I think this is by far the best solution of the ones you've proposed. It has the least impact on the game in general, and kills the whole tactic dead.

Extend casting time of non-targeted version only. Too much of a hack. Nothing else works that way, I don't like making up entirely new rules paradigms like that.

Allow Will saves/SR for creatures in the area. This is just asking for trouble. How can you have some silence and not total silence? You're not stopping people from hearing, you're stopping them from producing sound. So, what, the people who succeed can make sound, but others can't? Can the one hear the other? What about things that aren't people, like a squeaky door? Too complicated.

Every Creature in the area is deafened. Ok... kinda works... except that it doesn't stop anyone outside the field from hearing what's in it.... now you can't use it to cover up the sound of the barbarian hacking down a door. I don't like the way it changes the usefulness of the spell... it makes it into an almost purely combat oriented spell.

Change readied actions - ug... no way. A sweeping rules change to fix one annoying spell? Overkill, you'll undoubtably end up screwing up something else you don't think of until 3 months down the line.

So... there's my analysis. Making it a full round action changes very little except to make it impossible to use with a readied action, which is exactly what you want.

-The Souljourner