is this a valid tactic for shutting down a caster

[Quartz]

Alternatively, the target spellcaster can just move past his friend the Knight who will wallop any fool who comes close.

 

[eamon]

I think that's the whole reason for the button. If you throw the bag and then cast Silence on the button, it's an attended object and he gets a save. If you cast Silence on the button and then throw the bag, it was not an attended object and no save was applicable.

If you then allow a saving throw when it becomes an attended object, does that mean that if he passes the button to someone else, they get a save as well?

If I use this house rule: yes. This would work analogously to, say, spell resistance vs. spiritual weapon, which is checked when the weapon first strikes an opponent. The spell is dispelled if the creature resists (or, in this case, saves). It's also mechanically similar to how disbelievable illusions work, in that you get a saving throw when you interact; however, unlike "will disbelief" saves, which do not end the spell, this saving throw would.

However, I'm not thrilled with this house-rule (it's a nasty hack which pretty much admits that silence is broken). I think I'm more likely to just ignore the issue, despite the fact that it's unlikely that an NPC, given such an effective tactic, would not choose to use it. A limiting factor is of course the fact that you need to be fairly close to throw a tanglefoot bag - or any device - whereas one of silences strengths is it's long range.

I'd much prefer if there were some valid, non-house-rule counter to tanglefoot bag + silence button style tactics. I suppose you could rule that if you succeed on the reflex saving throw, the button is stuck to the ground and not you - which, given that the DC is just 15, most high-level creatures will succeed at. And while the DC of the strength check to escape may be 17, the strength required to pry loose a single button is far less.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

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

In a 1 on 1 fight this could work, but all it would result in is burning up a number of spells of the target caster until the Silence caster runs out of Silence spells. Not ideal in a 1 on 1 fight, but it could be a game breaker for the target if the Silence caster has allies who are attacking the target. However, if the target caster starts doing something other than casting a spell, the readied action might not work, depending on what the ready trigger is. ie: If you readed for 'when he casts a spell', and the target pulled out a wand, I would be inclined to rule that the wand use does not trigger the Silence casters action. If your trigger was 'if he does anything other than move', you would get the trigger.

On top of that, the target caster could just take a run action and try to get beyond the range of Silence, then return fire with Magic Missile, or a similarly long ranged spell. This may not be an option if he is cornered.

Some other viable counter tactics occur to me to get past Silence. One of which is to use scrolls with the Silent Spell MetaMagic feat. It may seem counter intuitive, but based on a separate thread in this forum, it is legal within the rules. Another would be for the Silence target to ready an action to hit you with the spell the moment you take any action yourself (once outside of the area of effect of the Silence spell). Then it becomes a game of chicken / who will flinch first. Another consideration would be spells that are cast as an immediate action. The target could cast a standard spell, trigger the silence, then take a move action to get outside of the Silenced area, and then try an immediate spell.

Finally, this tactic is based on the assumption of one caster spamming silence vs one spell casting opponent. If the target has allies, he can hold his action until one of his allies moves adjacent to the silence caster. Since the Silence caster is going on a readied action, he does not get a 5 foot step to avoid the AoO.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Hypersmurf]

Since the Silence caster is going on a readied action, he does not get a 5 foot step to avoid the AoO.

As long as you haven't already moved this round, a readied action can include a 5' step.

-Hyp.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

As long as you haven't already moved this round, a readied action can include a 5' step.

-Hyp.

I stand corrected.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[evilbob]

On top of that, the target caster could just take a run action and try to get beyond the range of Silence, then return fire with Magic Missile, or a similarly long ranged spell. This may not be an option if he is cornered.

Finally! The first response to my original question that suggests a valid tactic to eventually counter this move - although it would take two rounds to counter it and it would only buy the caster one round. It also requires a large area to run in (and flat ground to run over). Still, though: good thinking!

The way I see it: when the caster runs, he puts himself some distance between himself and the cleric. This would trigger the cleric's action, so he would move equal to 1 move action. However, the caster can't run, then stop, and then cast*. He'd have to finish running - but hopefully he'd make it further than another move action from the cleric. The cleric's turn would come up first in the next round, and then he'd have to also run in order to close next to the caster. At that point, the caster's turn comes up, and he could actually move out of range and then cast a single spell. However, he'd better make it count, because on the next round the cleric can start the whole dance over again. But, the caster could always run again as well (given the space).

In a 1 on 1 fight this could work, but all it would result in is burning up a number of spells of the target caster until the Silence caster runs out of Silence spells...

Another would be for the Silence target to ready an action to hit you with the spell the moment you take any action yourself (once outside of the area of effect of the Silence spell). ..

Finally, this tactic is based on the assumption of one caster spamming silence vs one spell casting opponent...

Actually, no - none of these address my original post. Some people have misinterpreted (several times throughout the thread) what I posted to mean "casts silence repeatedly" but that's neither what I was originally asking, nor - in my opinion - a good tactic for anyone. Now, if you're responding to these folks as a tangent, then that's one thing: but if you're talking about the original question, none of these statements apply.

My OP involved casting the spell once and then constantly staying in range. Other than "spellcaster runs" - which still only buys one round every other round - I have yet to see a valid counter (that I didn't also mention in the OP).



*This is the only instance in which an immediate or swift spell could be used; if one was prepared, that would give the caster one additional spell to cast before the cleric started the dance again.

 

[evilbob]

Also, is there still no one who will offer an interpretation on the "interupting silence ruins scoll/uses wand charge: yes/no" question?

 

[akbearfoot]

If a wizard sees a cleric whos standing within a few steps of him, pause and start waiting, he would be an absolute fool to try and cast a spell nearby him.

If you want to avoid metagaming, then instead it's 'that guy in platemail with the holy symbol' My 12 ranks in spellcraft ought to know that the priest can cast silence...and generally, its in a wizards best interest to get the heck away from the cleric if hes managed to get that close in the first place.

You can't ready an action to both move and cast silence, so unless the wizard is a dummy then he should be able to get well out of your range.

Also, the wizard should have plenty of guards between you and him...if you ready an action to move to him every round, you SHOULD be provoking lots of AoOs...trips, grapples etc.

Thats assuming the wizard doesent have a levitate going, or spider climb, fly or invisibility, or potions of same, which also makes him a fool if he has none of those options.


Plus the wizard probably WANTS you to cast silence on yourself, since now you can't cast any heal spells when he fireballs you from 25' away.

 

[evilbob]

akbearfoot: Well... duh.

I wasn't looking for critiques of the situation - which was, in fact, hypothetical - but rather the tactic itself. I think this thread has shown that it seems to be a pretty solid tactic.


If you are intent on picking apart the example, however, I was actually not even thinking about a cleric silencing a wizard. I just used the example of a cleric casting the spell because its on a cleric's spell list and it's easy to think about. I was specifically thinking of a whisper gnome rogue attacking a cleric. This tells you that:
- the rogue will likely get close to the cleric without his notice (or at least, easily)
- he will likely go before the cleric in intiative order
- the rogue will likely have a greater movement than the cleric, since clerics often wear heavy armor and the whisper gnome has a 30' movement and often wears light armor
- due to the high movement discrepency and the rogue's skill list, he may even be able to tumble along with the cleric even around enemies
- neither of them are likely to be flying, spider climbing, etc.
- it is entirely probable that the cleric would have no idea that the whisper gnome could silence him - it would be a Knowledge(Local) check on the part of the cleric (for information on a humanoid), and that's not on their class list

So in my actual example, it seems highly likely that the cleric - who is a front-line fighter - would easily be close to the rogue and not see the tactic coming. It's also likely that a cleric would NOT move very far away to cast a spell, since he's either going to be healing or casting offensively and wouldn't want to lose position (also see: front line fighter). It's also likely the cleric couldn't get away from the rogue easily enough to shut down the tactic (other than running, as suggested above), especially since clerics don't usually have access to good movement spells such as fly or dimension door. And lastly, silencing a rogue can only help him, while silencing a cleric can only be bad for the cleric.

However: all of this is hard to explain and honestly completely immaterial to the discussion of the tactic. Not to mention it's pretty distracting from the overall point of the thread, especially if people wish to pick apart the example. So I didn't mention it.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

Ok, evil bob, here is a direct response. For the record though, I was responding to someone else in the thread at one point though.

Finally! The first response to my original question that suggests a valid tactic to eventually counter this move - although it would take two rounds to counter it and it would only buy the caster one round. It also requires a large area to run in (and flat ground to run over). Still, though: good thinking!

Original Question in point form:
Bob = Cleric
Xaxos = Mage

Round 1:
Bob moves next to Xaxos, readies a Silence to cast on himself (NOT BOB) as soon as Bob casts the spell.

Xaxos casts a spell, triggers Bobs action. Xaxos loses spell.

Round 2 -> N:
Bob readies a move action to move next to Xaxos if Xaxos moves away.
Xaxos moves to cast a spell, triggers Bobs action. Bob moves adjacent, xaxos is again in a Silenced area, loses spell.

Rules complication: Since Bob cannot hear Xaxos, can he figure out of Xaxos is casting a verbal only spell? I will ignore that for now.

Yeah, the run action will work in Xaxos's favor, especially if Bob is in medium or heavier armour. A potion of invisibility would also work out, since Bob's tactic depends on being able to move towards Xaxos. The potion would buy one round to either negate Bobs ability to chase Xaxos, or for Xaxos to cast Greater Invisibility if he has it.

A Tanglefoot bag may work, but it is a non optimal solution past the early levels. A smoke stick could work quite well for Xaxos assuming that he is able to break line of sight and that Bob is unable to guess which way he went.

Presuming a strict 1v1 fight, once the tactic became apparent, Xaxos could just double move away, and either wait for the spell to expire, or wait for Bob to make some kind of direct attack. Once Bob makes an attack action, Xaxos can move clear and cast a spell. Not an ideal solution, but workable outside of something better.

END COMMUNICATION