Questions on "Silence" Spell

[Mr Funtastic]

Okay, here we go:

1. For years now I've been playing silence as a means to prevent spellcasting of spells with verbal components. This application of the spell is correct, right? I mean that silence does in fact prevent spellcasting of such spells right?

2. When someone enters an area, on which a silence spell is active, is he entitled to a save to prevent the spell's effect?
For example, if silence is cast on an unattended rock, while there is no one around it, no saves are rolled by anyone. But is a creature entitled to a saving throw, if he later on gets within 20ft of the stone?

 

[hong]

1. Yes

2. No, which is why a silenced grappler is a great anti-spellcaster tactic

 

[Someone]

Okay, here we go:

1. For years now I've been playing silence as a means to prevent spellcasting of spells with verbal components. This application of the spell is correct, right? I mean that silence does in fact prevent spellcasting of such spells right?

Sure:

A silence spell or a gag spoils the incantation (and thus the spell).

2. When someone enters an area, on which a silence spell is active, is he entitled to a save to prevent the spell's effect?
For example, if silence is cast on an unattended rock, while there is no one around it, no saves are rolled by anyone. But is a creature entitled to a saving throw, if he later on gets within 20ft of the stone?

No save unless the spell is cast directly on a creature or an attended object (one a creature is carrying or wearing); once the spell works, it affects everyone without further saves.

 

[Mr Funtastic]

Ok, i see. That's what i thought to be honest and that's how i've been using it till now.

It's just that, on our last session, my players used silence in several ways and managed to sneak and kill all the priests of a temple by night, without giving the priests any chance to alert anyone or to cast spells. Besides giving them bonus xp for ingenuity, i was thinking that maybe we were using the spell in a wrong way. But it seems we didn't...

Thx anyway for your time.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

The Silence spells have been a long time tactic in D&D, and to me it seems overpowered that you can stop any spell with the silenced-grappler or a silenced-slingstone.

I'm so paranoid of it that whenever I play a pure caster I try to find a Metamagic Rod of Silent Spell ASAP.

Sounds like it's time for your BBEG's to have level 3 cleric allies.

 

[Mr Funtastic]

Btw another question:

Does a thundering weapon deal sonic damage within the area of a silence spell?

 

[Alpha Polaris]

I think not.

This spell provides a defense against sonic or language-based attacks.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I kinda think it's a problem that such a low level spell can totally whose spellcasters. If the game weren't so dependent on Verbal spells, it wouldn't be so bad. But in the grand scheme of things, the silence spell is something I can live with.

 

[billd91]

Truthfully, I don't think I would mind taking Silent Spell and Still Spell and even Eschew Material Components and get rid of them in favor of a spellcasting check. Each component you drop raises the check you'd need by 5 or so. It would mean that any spell you have could be cast in a silence area without advance prep, but it would be harder.
Of course, we've never had a spellcasting check in D&D before so it would be a bit of an alien concept, but I could really get behind it as a way forward.

Still, the silence spell isn't a sure thing against a prepared caster. A sorcerer in one of the games I run took Silent Spell and Still Spell as his first two feats at 1st level even though they weren't very useful yet. He has since proved their worth on multiple occasions. A cleric with Silent Spell and Domain Spontaneity may be able to effectively defend himself against the silence as well.

 

[moritheil]

This is part of why spell-like abilities are occasionally much better than spells.