Locating a Druid using Natural Spell

[Felix]

This is a spillover from a General RPG Discussion thread concerning Augment Summoning. That thread is peppered with Natural Spell talk, and can be found here: Augment Summoning ... how worthwhile?

The question is: what does it take for someone to identify a druid who is wildshaped and casting a spell? I.e., does Natural Spell benefit the druid in a manner other than by simply allowing him to cast spells while wildshaped?



For ease of use, Natural Spell is this:

NATURAL SPELL [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Wis 13, wild shape ability.
Benefit: You can complete the verbal and somatic components of spells while in a wild shape. You substitute various noises and gestures for the normal verbal and somatic components of a spell.
You can also use any material components or focuses you possess, even if such items are melded within your current form. This feat does not permit the use of magic items while you are in a form that could not ordinarily use them, and you do not gain the ability to speak while in a wild shape.

This is what the Spellcraft skill entry has to say about identifying spells being cast:

DC 15+spell level. Identify a spell being cast. (You must see or hear the spell’s verbal or somatic components.) No action required. No retry.

This is Still Spell and Silent Spell, just for fun...

STILL SPELL [METAMAGIC]
Benefit: A stilled spell can be cast with no somatic components.
Spells without somatic components are not affected. A stilled spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level.

SILENT SPELL [METAMAGIC]
Benefit: A silent spell can be cast with no verbal components. Spells without verbal components are not affected. A silent spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level.
Special: Bard spells cannot be enhanced by this metamagic feat.

And now, the SRD on spell components:

COMPONENTS
A spell’s components are what you must do or possess to cast it. The Components entry in a spell description includes abbreviations that tell you what type of components it has. Specifics for material, focus, and XP components are given at the end of the descriptive text. Usually you don’t worry about components, but when you can’t use a component for some reason or when a material or focus component is expensive, then the components are important.

Verbal (V): A verbal component is a spoken incantation. To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice. A silence spell or a gag spoils the incantation (and thus the spell). A spellcaster who has been deafened has a 20% chance to spoil any spell with a verbal component that he or she tries to cast.

Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.

Material (M): A material component is one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible. Don’t bother to keep track of material components with negligible cost. Assume you have all you need as long as you have your spell component pouch.

Focus (F): A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused. As with material components, the cost for a focus is negligible unless a price is given. Assume that focus components of negligible cost are in your spell component pouch.

And this is the last post in that previous thread, so we can pick up where we left off:

If it takes a DC10 to spot a human caster at a certain range casting a spell, then by the size rules, I would estimate that it's more like a DC18 to spot a tiny animal doing so at the same distance. I think in actuality the tiny animal would be even harder to detect than that, but this at least attempts to follow existing rules.

If the human is standing in the open (ie - not trying to hide), then there is no DC needed to spot him. You see him automatically. Stuff might be in the way, it might be dark, or whatever, but barring that there is no spot DC to see someone standing in front of you.

If he's hiding, THEN there is a DC.

Do you know why? Imagine the ridiculousness if you said it took even a dc 0 to spot a human being standing in the open with no cover. Half the time a peasant would be unable to see a man standing in a clear field 100 feet away. So this is a patently silly change to the rules unless you're going to overhaul the whole lot.

If the squirrel is hiding, then the DC to spot him is some 12 higher than for a human (3 size categories I'd say).

A human can hide in a crowd. A squirrel can hide in a crowd.

Just use the mechanics that are there instead of trying to make them up. If someone is trying not to be seen, they are HIDING.

If they are trying not to appear suspicious, they are BLUFFING. Probably. I wouldn't let a human caster get away with a bluff to conceal their spellcasting, so I won't let a squirrel one do so either.

They're fairly simple and generic rules. They cover a lot of situations. They don't really need to be altered just because you think a druid shouldn't even need to TRY to hide...

Spellcraft requires training to use, so this method of detection largely limits it to other casters and perhaps a few higher level types that have decided to invest in it. I'm not saying that spellcraft shouldn't factor into the detection, just that it may wind up being overly restrictive. If you are up close to an animal casting a spell, I'd say that even an untrained person might be able to notice something it's doing and figure out that it's casting a spell. So maybe for these purposes, I'd make an exception and allow untrained spellcraft checks (DC15+) to determine if those wierd movements are spellcasting. Still requires the spot check to be made 1st.

So wait - first you think that spotting a squirrel casting spells should be easy. So easy that the untrained eye can tell.

In addition, crossing species likely makes detection harder. There are spells that factor in species-crossing (Hideous Laughter) and impose a +4 penalty/bonus on the roll. For crossing creature types w/ spellcraft checks, I'd suggest applying that. That moves the DC to 19+. For an untrained person, it will be pretty difficult, but for someone with enough ranks in spellcraft (which I guess could cover topics like alternate species casting), it's a makeable roll.

But now it should be hard? I don't get it. I really don't.

Oh, and way to devalue spellcraft even further. It's hard enough when half the stuff out there just uses SLA's and you can't counter them anyway. Now you can't even tell what they did...

 

[Tellerve]

I would think that unless you had knowledge (nature), Handle Animal, or Survival I wouldn't think you would be able to tell exactly why/what the animal was doing per se. If you had any of those above then you could tell the animal is acting a tad bit strangely. Maybe if you had Spellcraft the dm could make a roll for you. It certainly isn't cut and dry for sure. Maybe if you had the nature spell feat you would get an unhindered spellcraft check. Also, a knowledge (arcana) might be useful to know if that sparrow tapping around and squawking isn't some strain of magical sparrows but in fact is casting a spell. *shrugs* maybe that's a stretch but I dunno.

Just some thoughts,

Tellerve

 

[Saeviomagy]

I would think that unless you had knowledge (nature), Handle Animal, or Survival I wouldn't think you would be able to tell exactly why/what the animal was doing per se. If you had any of those above then you could tell the animal is acting a tad bit strangely.

So you're basically saying "There's a good chance that a druid using natural spell can stand right in the open in front of a character and cast spells, and the character won't notice him acting unusual in any way".

Maybe if you had Spellcraft the dm could make a roll for you. It certainly isn't cut and dry for sure. Maybe if you had the nature spell feat you would get an unhindered spellcraft check. Also, a knowledge (arcana) might be useful to know if that sparrow tapping around and squawking isn't some strain of magical sparrows but in fact is casting a spell.

It seems to me that you're going out of your way to make excuses for why someone wouldn't recognise a spellcasting animal.

Has it occured to you that the above mean a significant increase in the power of the natural spell feat?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Recently discussed in this thread.

-Hyp.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

"If they are trying not to appear suspicious, they are BLUFFING. Probably. I wouldn't let a human caster get away with a bluff to conceal their spellcasting, so I won't let a squirrel one do so either."

But would you allow the bluff skill for a non-mage to fake casting? It's not irrelevant; if you can "fake cast" with a Bluff skill, a druid could have a number of critters do so. The archer would be forced to pick a target, perhaps unsure of who is really the druid and who is just a squirrel.

 

[Saeviomagy]

But would you allow the bluff skill for a non-mage to fake casting? It's not irrelevant; if you can "fake cast" with a Bluff skill, a druid could have a number of critters do so. The archer would be forced to pick a target, perhaps unsure of who is really the druid and who is just a squirrel.

I can't say I'd let a bluff check alone fool someone - saying "oogy boogy boo" and waving your hands won't work if "oogy boogy boo" isn't a spell...

Probably -
You make a bluff check vs an opponents sense motive check.
If the bluff succeeds: "he's casting a spell"
if not: "he's pretending to cast a spell"

THEN
A spellcraft check vs the normal DC of the spell you're trying to emulate. Then of course your opponent needs to make his own spellcraft roll to identify.
Success on both: "He's casting fireball!"
Failure on either:"You don't know what he's casting - ain't no spell you recognise".


The upshot will probably be: The druid's li'l buddies fail their bluff check and their spellcraft check. If the opposing mage is lucky on the sense motive, they're made. If the opposing mage is lucky on the spellcraft, he'll pick the druid casting a real spell out of the fakes.

I know it sounds like one of those "but that sounds way more than I could do" scenarios, but the key here is that reality doesn't matter - for starters you're talking about a make-believe ability (identifying a spell being cast) and second of all you need to maintain game balance (so you can't just say "the druid is undetectable").

 

[Teneb]

(so you can't just say "the druid is undetectable").

I think we're just to the point where we need to agree to disagree, but I'll just say that in Kalendraf's game, my druid in wildshape is NOT undetectable. He's just a bit more difficult to detect. I would agree that a knowledge nature or something similar could very well detect my casting.

The other thing to keep in mind is that usually I'm flying above while my compatriots are charging below. Generally speaking, the enemy KNOWS there's a caster around somewhere (after the flamestrike anyway) but are more concerned with the monk and barbarian running down their throats to look for me anyway. At any rate Sav, I don't agree with you but that doesn't make your interpretation any less valid, just different from the way we do things in Kalendraf's game. Whatever works for each group is certainly the way to go.

 

[Kalendraf]

So wait - first you think that spotting a squirrel casting spells should be easy. So easy that the untrained eye can tell.

Note I said this was only "If you are up close to an animal casting a spell". I should have probably been more clear. By close I really mean a very close distance such as an adjacent square 5' away. If you are that close to an animal and focusing your attention on it, I think even the an untrained person would become suspicious when the see an animal do something really strange. If you are that close and can see a squirrel curl its 4th claw on each hand and slightly bend it's wrists then lock it's gaze at you, I don't think it would necessarily require a spellcraft to identify it as odd. Then when his armor starts feeling burning hot to the touch, I'd say the Mr. Untrained has a heckuva good chance of making a connection that the squirrel may have just cast a spell at him.

crossing species likely makes detection harder

But now it should be hard? I don't get it. I really don't.

I suspect there will likely be no convincing you but I'll try again...

If there is a human character standing next to a human and an animal, and they both cast a spell, it will be easier for that character to notice the human's spellcasting motion than it is to detect the animal's motion. The human suddenly starts doing odd motions with his fingers and hands and says wierd words. The animal moves its claws/wings/whatever and makes a few animal sounds. Unless you are familiar with that animal's normal behavior, detecting a spellcasting animal is simply going to be harder than it is to detect the human's spellcasting.

 

[Kalendraf]

The other thing to keep in mind is that usually I'm flying above while my compatriots are charging below. Generally speaking, the enemy KNOWS there's a caster around somewhere (after the flamestrike anyway) but are more concerned with the monk and barbarian running down their throats to look for me anyway.

Teneb brings up a great point that I'd failed to mention. This particular party is a bit large (7 characters) and features other casters including a Cleric (rather obvious by the emblem his church makes them wear), a pair of bards (again rather obvious with mandolins over their shoulders, and/or their singing), a rogue , a half-orc barbarian/fighter, a monk (in robes who is often mistaken for a spellcaster) and finally the wildshaping druid. Outdoors, the druid generally takes bird-form and scouts from above.

For outdoor encounters, that often causes situations like this:

A) Druid spots enemy, gets into position to attack. Launches a spell like Flamestrike. Party closes on position.

B1) Enemy that just got hit looks around and sees rest of party (which includes the obvious cleric, 2 bards and a man in robes) closing on their position. Orders are often given to focus their attacks on those 4 targets (apparent spellcasters). In the next few rounds, the cleric & bards typically perform spellcasting, so it is tougher for enemies to realize there might be an additional caster somewhere, especially if they aren't familiar with magic. In the case of non-intelligent or low-intelligent monsters, they will seek out the party members they see and attack them, ignoring the bird.

B2) Enemy gets torched, looks around, spots bird and is bright enough to consider it might be involved (familiar, etc). Also, sees rest of party closing on position. Orders are given to attack the 4 apparent spellcasting targets as well as the bird. Depending on how bird reacts (doesn't die from 1st arrow or spell hit, doesn't flee), the enemy can discover it's more than just a bird, but it may take a few rounds.

B3) Enemy gets torched, spots bird and party. However, this foe has magical training and may end up casting detection spells, use spellcraft or just keep a keen eye on the bird during the battle. They'll may figure it out within the first round or so. The instant they realize the bird is casting spells, it becomes a primary target of any spells and/or ranged attacks.

 

[Felix]

Kalendraf:

The problem we're having is that Saeviomagy and I apply Natural Spell as:

Absolutely everything is the same, except that Natural Spell allows a wildshaped Druid to cast while wildshaped.

If absolutely everything is the same, then Natural Spellcasting as a critter should be no more difficult to recognize than a humanoid casting.

You read more into the feat thinking:

By changing shapes, the druid's spellcasting becomes mechanically harder to detect.

Esentially, that's the disagreement. And if you look at the feat, the only power this feat gives you is the ability to cast while wildshaped. And that's where the power should stop. If you add power to that feat, OK, no worries; it's a House Rule. They're cool. But it's not RAW.