D&D 5E Question for GMs... How "Secret" is Scrying?

[emeraldbeacon]

This is a more opinion-based question than anything, but I'm wondering... from the perspective of the GM, how much information are you required or expected to give your players, if some effect is scrying upon them?

Obviously, this could go anywhere from "none at all," implying that even the wisdom saving throws are made in secret by the GM, requiring the players to "discover" the spying on their own, to "painfully obvious," announcing that a player needs to make saving throws at regular intervals, implying in the metagame that there are watchful eyes upon them.

Further, if you do go with a heavily secretive method, what kinds of hints (if any) do you give your party, when it comes to discovering the spell? Do you give the targeted player any feedback on the attempts (or perhaps only on successes or failures)? Do you require any degree of perception checks for those using detect magic or see invisibility, to notice the scrying sensor?

 

[Yaarel]

The Scrying spell description is what it is. I call for a save.

But I prefer the caster roll (secretly) for success, then the target roll to sense being watched. It is worth rewriting the spell. This seems like an effect that can be resolved by skill checks.

 

[Lyxen]

Just because there is a save does not mean that there needs to be a roll by whoever is controlling the target, and even if there is a roll, that whoever is controlling the target knows that it is a save against scrying.

The spell description also says : "If a target knows you're casting this spell..." which implies that it is possible that they do not know that you are casting it.

Finally, the SAC is clear as well: "Do you always know when you’re under the effect of a spell? You’re aware that a spell is affecting you if it has a
perceptible effect or if its text says you’re aware of it."

It's not the case with Scrying, it's clearly one of those "subtle spells" that do not create flashes and bangs, although of course it's cool to make subtle hints. A save is a pure game effect and does not mean anything in the game world, so it also depends how much you can trust your players not to metagame.

It's all in the storytelling, as it should always be.

 

[TheSword]

Yes, I go with the “you have a strong feeling of being watched”. I would allow detect magic to detect the sensor… it’s a good reason to have the spell in a slot, rather than just cast as a ritual.

 

[MarkB]

So bear in mind that this works both ways. Are you going to spoil the players' fun later on by having their opponents always sensing that they're being scryed on and going all coy, rather than just happening to break into a bout of spontaneous exposition?

 

[Li Shenron]

This is a more opinion-based question than anything, but I'm wondering... from the perspective of the GM, how much information are you required or expected to give your players, if some effect is scrying upon them?

Obviously, this could go anywhere from "none at all," implying that even the wisdom saving throws are made in secret by the GM, requiring the players to "discover" the spying on their own, to "painfully obvious," announcing that a player needs to make saving throws at regular intervals, implying in the metagame that there are watchful eyes upon them.

Further, if you do go with a heavily secretive method, what kinds of hints (if any) do you give your party, when it comes to discovering the spell? Do you give the targeted player any feedback on the attempts (or perhaps only on successes or failures)? Do you require any degree of perception checks for those using detect magic or see invisibility, to notice the scrying sensor?

I don't see the need for adding much beyond the spells descriptions. Both Clairvoance and Scrying create an invisibile (but not explicitly intangible or immaterial) sensor, so if there isn't a very particular condition that might make the PCs notice something invisible without a special ability (for example smoke coming from a campfire, or moving underwater) then I don't need to worry about them noticing it. Even in those corner cases, if I decide to grant a check at all, it won't immediately tell them "you see a Scry sensor" but be more vague, since they would at best only notice a fist-size "hole" in the smoke or water.

The saving throw on Scrying is a bit of an oddity. Mechanically, it is there only for the spell to have a chance of failure. Clairvoyance always works, but it can't be used to find (and follow) someone, otherwise the two spells are very similar in how the "sensor" works. Anyway, because it's a Wisdom ST, it sounds like the target can "resist" being found, but nothing indicates it will be aware of the casting, whether it worked or not. Therefore, I would not make the target aware of anything at all, just like the target doesn't necessarily know it touched something poisonous if the poison didn't work on it.

Whether how to roll, for me it's a matter of table convenience:

• you can ask the player to roll specifically what roll and against what effect (in case someone might get to use a specific bonus for it)
• you can ask the player to roll generically a d20 without saying what it is for, and the DM applies the bonuses secretly
• you can have the DM roll secretly but tell the players what he is rolling (just to hide the results)
• you can have the DM do everything secretly without even saying there was a roll at all

I don't buy into any method forever. In case of Scrying it would make more sense to me to go with the last option, but if my players like rolling or if we haven't rolled anything for a while, I would probably ask them for a Wisdom save without telling anything else, there are so many possible things requiring one, that they won't be able to guess easily.

 

[Lyxen]

• you can ask the player to roll specifically what roll and against what effect (in case someone might get to use a specific bonus for it)
• you can ask the player to roll generically a d20 without saying what it is for, and the DM applies the bonuses secretly
• you can have the DM roll secretly but tell the players what he is rolling (just to hide the results)
• you can have the DM do everything secretly without even saying there was a roll at all

Great advice and I like the list, like you I'm not sticking to a specific method but I use whatever method seems the most appropriate at any given time. I would just like to add two, which we use a lot as well

• you can ask the player to roll specifically but not let him see the result of the roll
• you can ask the player to roll generically a d20 without saying what it is for, but not let him see the result of the roll

You can do this in most VTTs, or you can have him roll in an opaque glass so that only the DM can see the result. It's good to have the player involved, but it really prevents metagaming. We use this a lot in particular for stealth checks, but in this case it can be interesting as well so that the players do not metagame whether there was something to see or not.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

If the character is not meaningfully distracted, not in the presence of some kind of powerful magic (e.g. meeting with an archfey, carrying an artifact on their person, currently casting a powerful spell, etc.), and reasonably able to take in details of their surroundings, I'd give them a chance to know, but a chance to not know either. Failing a detection check, but passing the save, might still reveal that some kind of magical effect happened, but its exact nature would be elusive.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

When you say that the "victim" doesn't know, do you mean "the character" (and you ask the player to make the roll, potentially using abilities like Flash of Genius to succeed) or do you mean the player (so you roll in secret, not telling anything)?

 

[Lyxen]

When you say that the "victim" doesn't know, do you mean "the character" (and you ask the player to make the roll, potentially using abilities like Flash of Genius to succeed) or do you mean the player (so you roll in secret, not telling anything)?

The victim is the character, hopefully your players are never victims in your games.

And normally the character does not know barring special abilities, so all the procedures described above actually depend on the level of metagaming that you want the player to do or avoid. But note that even if you can trust the player not to metagame, sometimes it's better to keep it secret from him, it makes it easier to play for him.

On the other side, there are some players who don't trust their DM and don't like their DM to roll for them. It's silly, it's been a long time since I encountered one of these, but you find some now and then on the forums...