Locating a Druid using Natural Spell

[Brother MacLaren]

Probably -
You make a bluff check vs an opponents sense motive check.

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.

I was assuming that, facing a character without Spellcraft, the second roll would not be needed. Spellcraft cannot be used untrained, so a fighter or ranger without any ranks in the skill doesn't know that "oogy boogy boo" is not a spell. And they might have just a few ranks in Sense Motive, but with enough bluffers some will get lucky against a modest modifier.

That's why I was using an archer as the sample opponent; if ranger or fighter, they might not have the skills to see through this bluff. But bards make great archers, and they would have the skills needed. (In fact, the bard could also be a great "bluff caster," making the enemy mage waste his spells counterspelling or disguising an illusion spell as a summoning.)

I apologize if it seems OT, but to me it's all about this: how well can an untrained character recognize spellcasting? I have no problem with allowing a character with Spellcraft to recognize casting by a being in any form.

 

[smetzger]

I apologize if it seems OT, but to me it's all about this: how well can an untrained character recognize spellcasting? I have no problem with allowing a character with Spellcraft to recognize casting by a being in any form.

According to the RAW spellcasting done by anyone or anything is automatically recognized as spellcasting.

There are plenty of logic arguments against the RAW. However, I have not seen any rule that says that spellcasting is harder to recognize as spellcasting just because the caster is not a humanoid.

But you say.. "I am a small bird, there is an active combat going on and there are other birds in the vicinity."
I say ... "Use the rules for Hide/Spot and Listen over a distance vs. spell casting". But once you are spotted then the spellcasting by the RAW is recognized.

Really, Druids are the most powerful class. They don't need any slack.

 

[Nail]

But you say.. "I am a small bird, there is an active combat going on and there are other birds in the vicinity."
I say ... "Use the rules for Hide/Spot and Listen over a distance vs. spell casting". But once you are spotted then the spellcasting by the RAW is recognized.

Right.

Or, put another way: "Everyone is assumed to see and hear everything that goes on during combat, except under very specific circumstances, such as Hiding or being invisibile"

The "it's too busy to notice" arguement doesn't wash. Sorry!

Moreover: D&D is a magical world! Spellcasters are *not* a strange thing to see, especially in combat. Why wouldn't the enemy suspect the small strangely-acting bird of casting spells??!

Heck, people were burned in real-world Salem for less!

 

[kigmatzomat]

According to the RAW spellcasting done by anyone or anything is automatically recognized as spellcasting.

Where in the RAW is that? I know that spellcasting evokes an AoO but that's not "hey, he's casting a spell so by the RAW I get to attack him" it's "Sucker's let his guard drop!" Same reason a stilled/silent/eschewed spell evokes an AoO.

AFAIK, without Spellcraft you can only guess when someone is casting a spell and then only for styles of magic you recognize.

So I'd think you'd need:

Spot vs. distance/size to see the druid/animal if they aren't in the open. Apply cover/concealment mods.

Spellcraft (if available) to recognize spell being cast.

Knowledge: Nature (if no spellcraft) to recognize the animal is doing something odd. Increase the DC if there is combat since animals will react wildly near a fight.

 

[Kalendraf]

Kalendraf:
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.

When looking at this, I'm not taking the narrow approach of just considering the Natural Casting feat. Instead, I'm starting from the point of considering how difficult this situation would be to detect, whether it involves a wildshaped druid, an awakened animal or some magically altered animal able to cast spells. Then it's time to start looking at the related rules and determine if they really cover this situation.

What I'm seeing is that there seems to be inadequate rules definition to handle this case. In other words, animal spellcasting is a gray area that is not explicitly covered in enough depth to clarify how easy/hard it is to detect. There seem to be 2 camps on how to handle this problem.

A) Assume a few basic rules which were written for detecting humanoid type casters actually cover every spellcasting situation, no matter how bizarre the application or side-effects become.

"Hey, I just saw a mouse 600 feet away casting a spell. Although I can't normally see a mouse's toes more than 10 feet away or it's whiskers from more than a couple feet away, I was somehow able to notice this mouse's first and third toe bend slightly as his 2nd whisker twitched. From my 1st year in wizard camp, I remember studying all about mouse-spellcasting and I remember every single mouse-casting gesture. That was a Barkskin spell."

B) Realize the basic rules are just that, basic and are not really written for or detailed enough for the purpose of detecting animal (or plant, etc) spellcasting.

I would like to see WotC address this to give us some closure. Otherwise, I suspect there will continue to be disagreement on this matter. Perhaps Skip or someone could dedicate an article to it on their website.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Moreover: D&D is a magical world! Spellcasters are *not* a strange thing to see, especially in combat. Why wouldn't the enemy suspect the small strangely-acting bird of casting spells??!

I agree with this point. If there are only a few animals around, one squirrel acted maybe a little peculiar, and you do not know where the Flamestrike came from, it is pretty obvious how things are going to unfold...

Where I part with others is giving automatic perfect knowledge that the suspect behavior is spellcasting. I care less about the Flamestrike and more about utility spells like Speak With Animals, Bull's Strength, etc.

 

[Felix]

B) Realize the basic rules are just that, basic and are not really written for or detailed enough for the purpose of detecting animal (or plant, etc) spellcasting.

So are we agreed that your ruling is your own common-sense creation, rather than a rule-based decision?

"Hey, I just saw a mouse 600 feet away casting a spell. Although I can't normally see a mouse's toes more than 10 feet away or it's whiskers from more than a couple feet away, I was somehow able to notice this mouse's first and third toe bend slightly as his 2nd whisker twitched. From my 1st year in wizard camp, I remember studying all about mouse-spellcasting and I remember every single mouse-casting gesture. That was a Barkskin spell."

You forget...

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.

600 feet is a -60 to both Spot and Listen. All your fieldmouse has to do is say "I hide behind a blade of grass before I cast the spell" and he's hiding. And if you can't see or hear the components, then you don't know the twitching mouse whiskers are the somatic component to Barkskin.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Kelendraf, I disagree with you also.

The way I run it: foe gets a plain ol' Spot check (not exactly easy given the chipmunk's size, natural bonus to Hide, and possibly cover from foliage.)

If he makes the Spot check, he's aware of the chipmunk, and will see any spellcasting it makes.

 

[Kalendraf]

So are we agreed that your ruling is your own common-sense creation, rather than a rule-based decision?

What I'm agreeing with is the fact that there are not adequate rules to cover the detection of animal spellcasting. I'm also agreeing that that when such a gap in the rules exists (this is merely one example), the DM is faced with the prospect of either limiting himself to using a few rules which are clearly not written for the case at hand and which lead to ludicrous rulings, or he can try to attempt to use situational modifiers and other tools he has access to for adjudicating it.

You forget...

600 feet is a -60 to both Spot and Listen.

As someone else pointed out earlier, the spot and listen checks (and hence, the application of the distance penalty) are only required if the mouse attempts to be stealthy (hide & move silent). In my example, I never said the mouse was trying to be stealthy. Don't assume he was.

All your fieldmouse has to do is say "I hide behind a blade of grass before I cast the spell" and he's hiding. And if you can't see or hear the components, then you don't know the twitching mouse whiskers are the somatic component to Barkskin.

But what about the case where the mouse doesn't try to hide or move silent? According to the rules you are using, a character 600 feet away can now suddenly detect the mouse's spell. That's a 2 inch animal 2 football fields away. With really good vision, you might be able to see a mouse at that distance, but I seriously doubt anyone can see its toes and whiskers to detect it's spell. At that distance it's squeeks will be extremely hard to hear as well.

To me, this simply proves that RAW are inadequate for this case. At this point we either need better, more refined rules to address this case, or the DM needs to open his toolbox and start doing part of his job by applying stuff like situational mod's and so forth to better handle the situation.

 

[smetzger]

Where in the RAW is that? I know that spellcasting evokes an AoO but that's not "hey, he's casting a spell so by the RAW I get to attack him" it's "Sucker's let his guard drop!" Same reason a stilled/silent/eschewed spell evokes an AoO.

AFAIK, without Spellcraft you can only guess when someone is casting a spell and then only for styles of magic you recognize.

No, you need spellcraft to identify the spell. You don't need spellcraft to identify that a spell is being cast.

From Spellcraft --- 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.

Also, check the rules on counter spells. There is no skill check to identify that the enemy caster is casting a spell. There is also no mention of applying to only humanoids.

Ok, I showed you the rules that show that one automatically knows when someone is casting a spell. Now you show me the rule where not having a humanoid form changes this.

This is the rules forum. Its fine if you believe a rule doesn't make sense because of such and such logic/real world example. But that doesn't change the rule.