ready action vs silent still spell

[Sixchan]

I'd either go with a high spot check to allow the archer to see that he is casting, or a sense motive to work out that he is casting. So I guess I'm halfway between the two sides. Although I wish people could debate without sinking to personal insults.

 

[IceBear]

But what would you guys call the DC?

I am thinking it would have to be over 20. And lets say the archer is at 40 ft (-4 to check), and a -20 circumstance. That means our archer would need a 44 check to spot the wizard cast so he could fire his arrow.

But I would like to know what you guys think.

Well, unfortunately I think that would depend a lot on the circumstances in my opinion. If the mage in question has cast a lot of silent stilled spells in one combat I can see it getting easier and easier to spot. If the archer is also a spellcaster who can cast silent, stilled spells it might be easier than for someone who can't.

I think I cut and paste someone's house rules (born from that last debate) into my notes at home so I'll have to look it up when I get home. I do believe that those rules had Sense Motive in there too - Spot check to notice the caster concentrating and then a Sense Motive to determine it's a spell, but I haven't really used them in a game so I could be remembering wrong.

IceBear

 

[Zulkir of Dartmouth]

I can see both those points IceBear.

And if you get a chance I would love to see the house rules.

Thanks!

 

[Sixchan]

Well, unfortunately I think that would depend a lot on the circumstances in my opinion. If the mage in question has cast a lot of silent stilled spells in one combat I can see it getting easier and easier to spot. If the archer is also a spellcaster who can cast silent, stilled spells it might be easier than for someone who can't.

I think I cut and paste someone's house rules (born from that last debate) into my notes at home so I'll have to look it up when I get home.

IceBear

Also, if the mage has cast lots of Silent, stilled spells over multiple comabats before, I can see it getting harder to spot if the caster has been making active attempts to conceal his casting.

Hmm...maybe a skill or feat "conceal casting" as a houserule might be a nice idea here.

 

[IceBear]

Also, if the mage has cast lots of Silent, stilled spells over multiple comabats before, I can see it getting harder to spot if the caster has been making active attempts to conceal his casting.

Hmm...maybe a skill or feat "conceal casting" as a houserule might be a nice idea here.

Agreed, but it does take some concentration to cast the spell, so if the wizard is bouncing around, dodging attacks, etc and then suddenly stops with an intense look on his face (and the past three times that's happened against a spellcaster you got hit by a spell) the archer will probably know what's up.

IceBear

 

[Sixchan]

I suppose, but a particularly skilled wizard might be able to keep concentrating while running over flat ground. provided he doesn't have to keep aware of his surroundings (bumpy ground, lots of trees), he could probably cast a few "still" defensive spells while running away. I don't think attack spells would be possible without concentrating, since you've still got to concentrate to hit your target, but something like invisibility or mage armour might not be so hard. That's probably too much for a single feat. I think I might open a thread about this.

 

[IceBear]

I can see it as a feat, but not without one. I think it states somewhere in the magic section that it requires concentration (hence the concentration check to disrupt a spell) to cast a spell, no matter if it's offensive or defensive.

I personally see a wizard casting a spell while moving all the time. I don't see the round as being fragmented into move and then cast, but rather more fluid as moving while starting to cast. I still seeing the spellcaster as having to concentrate and it's this look of concentration that the archer is looking for.

Also, since a silent, stilled spell draws an AoO, the wizard is obviously less able to defend himself (that's what I meant by the wizard suddenly stopping dodging and weaving from attacks - not actual movement) and that might be another visual clue the archer could pick up.

IceBear

 

[isoChron]

I would go with the Sense Motive against a high DC. The wizard hasn't grown in power without knowing some standard tactics of his opponents. And he also may see the archer aiming at him but not shooting yet.
So he could cast on the defense (dodging incoming blows and so not standing still to concentrate) or fake (Bluff) spellcasting by standing still and closing eyes or whatever.
He takes the shot from the archer and THEN starts casting his spell.
So Sense Motive against a Bluff
or Sense Motive to know what he is up to while dodging.
Problem is the DC in the later case. Hmm, how about 25 - (Spell-level) ? So its easier to cast a 1st level spell than a 8th level spell.
Just my 2cents.
Bye

 

[Zulkir of Dartmouth]

Hey guys about that feat.
There is a feat called Disguise Spell (in S&S p 38)
It is for a bard but, it says....

"... Like a silent, stilled spell, a disguised spell can't be identified through a spellcraft check..... Unless the spell visibly emanates from you or observers have some other means of determining its source, they don't know where the effect came from."

Now I know that this is a bard feat and it is easy for a bard to look like he is doing something else while casting. But what if the mage who is casting the spell is just staring at his opponent, I know I can be concentrating on something else while looking at lots of stuff.

 

[IceBear]

Maybe. It's the look of concentration that we're trying to spot (or the sense that you're concentrating that we're trying to determine) not where you are looking.

I'd suspect that the DC for the checks would be high enough that the feat wouldn't be needed - especially since there aren't many spellcasters going around with silent, stilled spells to begin with.

IceBear