How Subtle is a Subtle Spell?

[ezekielraiden]

Pretty much exactly what the description says. How subtle is a Subtle Spell? Is it covert enough that no one would know the sorcerer has used it? Is it literally no more than "the spell happens without somatic/verbal components," such that anyone can tell you still cast it?

I don't believe there are any "right" answers, though of course I have my preferred answers. This is more "how does this community feel about it" than anything else.

[Jerrykhor]

The spell 'just happens' with no hand waving and magic-word chanting. If you're the only guy in the vicinity wearing a a pointy hat, fancy robes and holding a staff, or you are levitating around with your eyes glowing with light, they might suspect its you. Otherwise, nobody knows who did it.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

That depends on the spell effect.

If the effect is something like spirit guardians they will know you have casted a spell after you finish because you will have spirits orbiting you.

I can give you an example.
I have a sorcerer, I was wearing two shields(trying to solve a puzzle) and was attacked by a powerful golem.

A shield of force jumped into existence infront of me blocking the attack.

I have casted the shield spell subtly because I had no free hand.
The effect was a force blocking the attack.
A creature with knowledge about magic may recognise the spell effect but he have no way to perceive the casting (unless the spell have M component).

[Randomthom]

I've often toyed with the idea of showing up to a game with a character that nobody can tell what you do outside of some rather weak magic but things just "happen" around you sometimes. Eventually your party will understand but with liberal use of this metamagic you can become the ultimate assassin or manipulator.

What better assassin is there than the one who was stood right there close by and everyone saw did nothing to cause the death? In fact, unlike regluar assassination, crowds of observers become a strength to you, not a weakness. You've got loads of witnesses who can vouch that you were there but didn't do it...

[JellyPooga]

It's an interesting question. On the one hand, the spell has no verbal or somatic components, which means that if the spell doesn't have a material component, then there are no outward signs of the spell being cast (i.e. no chanting, no hand-waving). On the other hand, casting a Subtle Spell still requires whatever action was required to cast the spell, whether that be a Bonus Action, Reaction, Action or several Actions (for spells with longer casting times). This will obviously forgo you performing other actions of that type in that turn, so it could be argued that you're obviously doing something, even if it's just staring into space in concentration. Which brings me to two important points;

1) Any spell with a material component (which is many spells) will require interaction with either that/those component/s or a focus to cast the spell, including a free hand to do so, making a Subtle Spell with any material component definitively register on the "not-so-subtle" scale.

2) Spells with a casting time longer than 1 Action require you to Concentrate on casting that spell, including being able to be disrupted by incapacitation, taking damage or (at the GMs discretion) environmental effects. This implies that casting any spell requires a similar level of concentration, only that the casting time of most spells is short enough that those triggers don't occur during the cast-time. It can be argued that concentrating on anything is an obvious activity; after all, if someone is standing there thinking about something to the exclusion of doing anything else, it's usually pretty obvious. Now, it must be asserted that Concentration =/= Obviously casting a spell, but I'd say it's definitely not completely undetectable.

A third, albeit slightly more niche point I'd make is regarding the Mage Slayer feat, which states; "When a creature within 5ft of you casts a spell" as a trigger for one of its granted abilities. It makes no mention of components or subtlety, only the action of casting a spell. This implies that casting a spell is pretty obvious, regardless of the components involved in casting said spell. A similar argument can be made for the conditions of triggering the spell Counterspell.

So, we can say with certainty that;

A) Lacking somatic and verbal components does not mean a spell has zero components.
B) Casting a spell excludes performing other actions.
C) Casting a spell requires a certain degree of concentration. Casting a spell with a Casting Time longer than 1 Action requires literal Concentration.
D) There is no stated requirement to identify components of a spell in order to identify that a spell is being cast.

So, from this I would conclude that Subtle Spell is...not so subtle. Yes, it might allow you to cast spells whilst bound or gagged. Yes, it will allow you to cast spells while maintaining a degree of stealth. Will it allow you to stand in front of someone and cast a spell without them knowing about it? I'm going to say "no".

[BloodSnake'sCha]

It's an interesting question. On the one hand, the spell has no verbal or somatic components, which means that if the spell doesn't have a material component, then there are no outward signs of the spell being cast (i.e. no chanting, no hand-waving). On the other hand, casting a Subtle Spell still requires whatever action was required to cast the spell, whether that be a Bonus Action, Reaction, Action or several Actions (for spells with longer casting times). This will obviously forgo you performing other actions of that type in that turn, so it could be argued that you're obviously doing something, even if it's just staring into space in concentration. Which brings me to two important points;

1) Any spell with a material component (which is many spells) will require interaction with either that/those component/s or a focus to cast the spell, including a free hand to do so, making a Subtle Spell with any material component definitively register on the "not-so-subtle" scale.

2) Spells with a casting time longer than 1 Action require you to Concentrate on casting that spell, including being able to be disrupted by incapacitation, taking damage or (at the GMs discretion) environmental effects. This implies that casting any spell requires a similar level of concentration, only that the casting time of most spells is short enough that those triggers don't occur during the cast-time. It can be argued that concentrating on anything is an obvious activity; after all, if someone is standing there thinking about something to the exclusion of doing anything else, it's usually pretty obvious. Now, it must be asserted that Concentration =/= Obviously casting a spell, but I'd say it's definitely not completely undetectable.

A third, albeit slightly more niche point I'd make is regarding the Mage Slayer feat, which states; "When a creature within 5ft of you casts a spell" as a trigger for one of its granted abilities. It makes no mention of components or subtlety, only the action of casting a spell. This implies that casting a spell is pretty obvious, regardless of the components involved in casting said spell. A similar argument can be made for the conditions of triggering the spell Counterspell.

So, we can say with certainty that;

A) Lacking somatic and verbal components does not mean a spell has zero components.
B) Casting a spell excludes performing other actions.
C) Casting a spell requires a certain degree of concentration. Casting a spell with a Casting Time longer than 1 Action requires literal Concentration.
D) There is no stated requirement to identify components of a spell in order to identify that a spell is being cast.

So, from this I would conclude that Subtle Spell is...not so subtle. Yes, it might allow you to cast spells whilst bound or gagged. Yes, it will allow you to cast spells while maintaining a degree of stealth. Will it allow you to stand in front of someone and cast a spell without them knowing about it? I'm going to say "no".

Some rules from XGtE:

Perceiving a Caster at Work
Many spells create obvious effects: explosions of fire, walls of ice, teleportation, and the like. Other spells, such as charm person, display no visible, audible, or otherwise perceptible sign of their effects, and could easily go unnoticed by someone unaffected by them. As noted in the Player’s Handbook, you normally don’t know that a spell has been cast unless the spell produces a noticeable effect.

But what about the act of casting a spell? Is it possible for someone to perceive that a spell is being cast in their presence? To be perceptible, the casting of a spell must involve a verbal, somatic, or material component. The form of a material component doesn’t matter for the purposes of perception, whether it’s an object specified in the spell’s description, a component pouch, or a spellcasting focus.

If the need for a spell’s components has been removed by a special ability, such as the sorcerer’s Subtle Spell feature or the Innate Spellcasting trait possessed by many creatures, the casting of the spell is imperceptible. If an imperceptible casting produces a perceptible effect, it’s normally impossible to determine who cast the spell in the absence of other evidence.

[diplomancer]

It depends on the spell. If a bolt of lightning springs from you, it will be hard to convince that you were not involved in it.

If you are a limping guy with a staff that only casts spells with no visual effects or effects that are hard to perceive the origin, you can get away with a lot.

[JellyPooga]

Some rules from XGtE:

I feel justified ignoring rules I don't own

That does answer the question quite succinctly though.

[ezekielraiden]

I feel justified ignoring rules I don't own

That does answer the question quite succinctly though.

Well, it does explicitly say, "As noted in the Player's Handbook," which means at least some of these rules are ones you own.

Targets
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect (described below).
Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature’s thoughts, typically goes unnoticed, unless a spell says otherwise.

Does that affect your position at all?

[JellyPooga]

Does that affect your position at all?

Whilst it certainly gives me pause for thought, I'd still be inclined (as a GM) to require a Deception check to conceal the action of casting a spell (opposed by Insight), even with the use of Subtle Spell or Innate Spellcasting. The effect of a spell might not be noticeable and there may be no M/S/V components to the spell, but that doesn't necessarily mean the act of spellcasting is entirely unnoticeable. I'll mention the Concentration thing again. If you're concentrating hard enough that being attacked or distracted by the environment can disrupt it, then you're likely concentrating hard enough for someone to notice you're thinking real hard about something. That said, I'd probably grant Advantage to the Deception check, and/or Disadvantage to the Insight check if Subtle spell was being used, depending on whether or not there was a Material Component and the circumstances.

[diplomancer]

Whilst it certainly gives me pause for thought, I'd still be inclined (as a GM) to require a Deception check to conceal the action of casting a spell (opposed by Insight), even with the use of Subtle Spell or Innate Spellcasting. The effect of a spell might not be noticeable and there may be no M/S/V components to the spell, but that doesn't necessarily mean the act of spellcasting is entirely unnoticeable. I'll mention the Concentration thing again. If you're concentrating hard enough that being attacked or distracted by the environment can disrupt it, then you're likely concentrating hard enough for someone to notice you're thinking real hard about something. That said, I'd probably grant Advantage to the Deception check, and/or Disadvantage to the Insight check if Subtle spell was being used, depending on whether or not there was a Material Component and the circumstances.

You can concentrate on a spell while dodging dragonfire and incoming arrows, while shooting arrows back, and giving orders to your companions. It's obviously not how you picture it.

This is a significant and unnecessary nerf to subtle spell.

[Morollan]

You can concentrate on a spell while dodging dragonfire and incoming arrows, while shooting arrows back, and giving orders to your companions. It's obviously not how you picture it.

This is a significant and unnecessary nerf to subtle spell.

I'd agree. The concentration argument is a red herring as far as I'm concerned. The list of things you can do whilst concentrating is fairly exhaustive and there's nothing to suggest that you are under any visible strain from concentrating when doing those things.

If the spell has a material component and the caster wanted to maintain plausible deniability I'd allow a sleight of hand check against any witnesses passive perception (perception if they have stated they are actively looking for such things). Other than that, I'd allow a subtle spell to be...subtle!

[Chronos]

The material component is no big deal, because you could just be putting your hands in your pocket, or holding on to your walking stick.

The spell effect, though, is likely to be, because an awful lot of spells are described as originating from you in some way. Including most damaging spells.

[diplomancer]

The material component is no big deal, because you could just be putting your hands in your pocket, or holding on to your walking stick.

The spell effect, though, is likely to be, because an awful lot of spells are described as originating from you in some way. Including most damaging spells.

Yes, except for the Bard (who has other ways of using his spell focus to conceal casting, namely, playing a song and using the instrument to cast the spell in the middle of the song), all casting classes have spell foci that are small enough to be held in a pocket (a crystal, for instance, or even an orb, could be small enough).

So, there is that guy who had his hands in his pocket a while ago and the king is now agreeing with everything he says... kinda tough to notice that. We are talking Sherlock Holmes levels of observation.

On the other hand, a mote of fire flying from you and exploding in the distance is going to be noticed by anyone who is looking at you.

[JellyPooga]

You can concentrate on a spell while dodging dragonfire and incoming arrows, while shooting arrows back, and giving orders to your companions. It's obviously not how you picture it.

This is a significant and unnecessary nerf to subtle spell.

Hmm...

Yes, I'll concede that you can dodge arrows passively with AC, or evade dragonfire without use of an action (if you have Evasion).

Yes, I'll concede that concentrating on maintaining a spell that is already cast does not require an action and will allow you to do any of the above.

However, the only active, mechanical applications of any of the actions mentioned all require the use of an Action (shooting arrows, i.e. Attack), Bonus Action (giving orders, e.g. Bardic Inspiration, Master of Tactics) or Reaction (dodging dragonfire e.g. Shield Master, or incoming arrows e.g. Deflect Missiles), any of which will preclude the use of a similar action type (i.e. Bonus Action, Reaction or Action) at the same time, including casting a spell (i.e. you can't shoot arrows and cast a spell with a Casting Time of one Action or more, simultaneously).

My argument is that the concentration to cast a spell (not maintain it) may be obvious enough to notice, given that it requires the use of more than a non-Action, regardless of whether it has any obvious components.

You can't Dash and cast Sleep.
You can't aim and shoot while casting Magic Missile.
You can't raise your shield (Shield Master) against a Flamestrike after failing to Counterspell it.

The act of casting a spell is sufficient that it stops you from doing anything else of significance at the time and for the duration of casting, regardless of whether you're waving your hands, speaking or manipulating objects or not, to do so. I'd argue that in order to conceal that effort, the effort of casting a spell, even without any components, would require some kind of additional focus, concentration or effort beyond that of merely casting the spell (i.e. a Deception check), in much the same way that merely walking along does not automatically make you unnoticeable without the additional focus, concentration and effort of trying to be stealthy (i.e. a Stealth check).

[Morollan]

The act of casting a spell is sufficient that it stops you from doing anything else of significance at the time and for the duration of casting, regardless of whether you're waving your hands, speaking or manipulating objects or not, to do so. I'd argue that in order to conceal that effort, the effort of casting a spell, even without any components, would require some kind of additional focus, concentration or effort beyond that of merely casting the spell (i.e. a Deception check), in much the same way that merely walking along does not automatically make you unnoticeable without the additional focus, concentration and effort of trying to be stealthy (i.e. a Stealth check).

To use your analogy, someone casting a non-subtle spell is 'merely walking along'. Someone casting a subtle spell is spending resources (sorcery points) in order to effectively achieve the same result as a stealth check. I don't see any need for additional hoops to jump through.

[sophontteks]

Hmm...

Yes, I'll concede that you can dodge arrows passively with AC, or evade dragonfire without use of an action (if you have Evasion).

Yes, I'll concede that concentrating on maintaining a spell that is already cast does not require an action and will allow you to do any of the above.

However, the only active, mechanical applications of any of the actions mentioned all require the use of an Action (shooting arrows, i.e. Attack), Bonus Action (giving orders, e.g. Bardic Inspiration, Master of Tactics) or Reaction (dodging dragonfire e.g. Shield Master, or incoming arrows e.g. Deflect Missiles), any of which will preclude the use of a similar action type (i.e. Bonus Action, Reaction or Action) at the same time, including casting a spell (i.e. you can't shoot arrows and cast a spell with a Casting Time of one Action or more, simultaneously).

My argument is that the concentration to cast a spell (not maintain it) may be obvious enough to notice, given that it requires the use of more than a non-Action, regardless of whether it has any obvious components.

You can't Dash and cast Sleep.
You can't aim and shoot while casting Magic Missile.
You can't raise your shield (Shield Master) against a Flamestrike after failing to Counterspell it.

The act of casting a spell is sufficient that it stops you from doing anything else of significance at the time and for the duration of casting, regardless of whether you're waving your hands, speaking or manipulating objects or not, to do so. I'd argue that in order to conceal that effort, the effort of casting a spell, even without any components, would require some kind of additional focus, concentration or effort beyond that of merely casting the spell (i.e. a Deception check), in much the same way that merely walking along does not automatically make you unnoticeable without the additional focus, concentration and effort of trying to be stealthy (i.e. a Stealth check).

The additional effort is that you are using your action to cast the spell in opposition to doing something else. The idea that an action must be spent doing something every round is only relevant during combat and its pure meta knowledge anyway. Rounds only exist for the ease of running combat mechanics and don't exist in RP. Without any movements or sounds during the casting I have no idea what the deception roll is hiding. Your decision is running in opposition to the abilities effects; deception check must be rolled to hide the tells the ability explicitly removes.

From the characters perspective there are no rounds. Everything is played in realtime. Characters are not remaining still while casting a spell, they have free movement and the ability to continue reacting to their environment, including dodging and parrying attacks. The concentration involved in an "action" isn't very limiting. Wizards aren't going through some form of mental constipation when they cast a spell. Its very fluid and happens within 6 seconds or less.

In addition, look what sorcerers give up to have their metamagics: very limited spells, loss of other useful metamagics, using a very limited long-rest resource. You are nerfing them very hard and I doubt many players would be pleased to build a subtle caster under these conditions.

[JellyPooga]

To use your analogy, someone casting a non-subtle spell is 'merely walking along'. Someone casting a subtle spell is spending resources (sorcery points) in order to effectively achieve the same result as a stealth check. I don't see any need for additional hoops to jump through.

No. Casting a Subtle Spell is walking along without waving your arms around and holding a conversation. Casting a Subtle Spell lets you attempt to sneak in the first place, so to speak. It doesn't mean you automatically succeed. I can see where you're coming from with the resource expenditure, but what I see is that resource being spent to furnish the opportunity, not to hand the desired result on a plate. Bear in mind the other benefits, beyond deception, of Subtle Spell; casting whilst bound, or casting in an area of Silence or gagged, for example. These are "freebies" that are furnished by that resource. Deception is not, necessarily (or explicitly), granted (unless using XGtE, as conceded earlier).

The additional effort is that you are using your action to cast the spell in opposition to doing something else. The idea that an action must be spent doing something every round is only relevant during combat and its pure meta knowledge anyway. Rounds only exist for the ease of running combat mechanics and don't exist in RP. Without any movements or sounds during the casting I have no idea what the deception roll is hiding. Your decision is running in opposition to the abilities effects; deception check must be rolled to hide the tells the ability explicitly removes.

From the characters perspective there are no rounds. Everything is played in realtime. Characters are not remaining still while casting a spell, they have free movement and the ability to continue reacting to their environment, including dodging and parrying attacks. The concentration involved in an "action" isn't very limiting. Wizards aren't going through some form of mental constipation when they cast a spell. Its very fluid and happens within 6 seconds or less.

In addition, look what sorcerers give up to have their metamagics: very limited spells, loss of other useful metamagics, using a very limited long-rest resource. You are nerfing them very hard and I doubt many players would be pleased to build a subtle caster under these conditions.

To expand my list of "Things you can't do whilst casting a spell", then;

- You can't cast Alarm (casting time 1 minute) whilst searching for secret doors.
- I would not allow you to cast Awaken (casting time 8 hours) whilst foraging or drawing a map while traveling (couldn't find a specific reference for this one, so this is a personal GM-call).

The point is that spending your Action every round to cast a spell with a cast time of longer than one Action is also representative of precluding doing anything else of significance during that time. Whether you're in combat or not. You don't stop "spending your Action" just because you're out of combat; you're still expending the same effort to "cast a spell" for the duration of the casting time. Yes, you can walk around and generally interact, but at the same time you are also casting a spell, utilising your concentration to do so. It's worth bearing in mind that whilst simple activities and object interactions don't require an action (e.g. opening a door), more complex tasks e.g. something as simple as opening a stuck door (reference: PHB pg.190; Other Activity on your Turn) or doing two such things within the space of 6 seconds, would be beyond the scope of performing whilst casting a spell simultaneously. Heck, as mentioned before, you can't even move 60ft (for your average Human) in 6 seconds whilst casting a "normal" spell. That's not that fast a speed to be travelling; I could roll a cigarette whilst walking that fast, but a spellcaster can't cast a spell at that pace.

[diplomancer]

No. Casting a Subtle Spell is walking along without waving your arms around and holding a conversation. Casting a Subtle Spell lets you attempt to sneak in the first place, so to speak. It doesn't mean you automatically succeed. I can see where you're coming from with the resource expenditure, but what I see is that resource being spent to furnish the opportunity, not to hand the desired result on a plate. Bear in mind the other benefits, beyond deception, of Subtle Spell; casting whilst bound, or casting in an area of Silence or gagged, for example. These are "freebies" that are furnished by that resource. Deception is not, necessarily (or explicitly), granted (unless using XGtE, as conceded earlier).



To expand my list of "Things you can't do whilst casting a spell", then;

- You can't cast Alarm (casting time 1 minute) whilst searching for secret doors.
- I would not allow you to cast Awaken (casting time 8 hours) whilst foraging or drawing a map while traveling (couldn't find a specific reference for this one, so this is a personal GM-call).

The point is that spending your Action every round to cast a spell with a cast time of longer than one Action is also representative of precluding doing anything else of significance during that time. Whether you're in combat or not. You don't stop "spending your Action" just because you're out of combat; you're still expending the same effort to "cast a spell" for the duration of the casting time. Yes, you can walk around and generally interact, but at the same time you are also casting a spell, utilising your concentration to do so. It's worth bearing in mind that whilst simple activities and object interactions don't require an action (e.g. opening a door), more complex tasks e.g. something as simple as opening a stuck door (reference: PHB pg.190; Other Activity on your Turn) or doing two such things within the space of 6 seconds, would be beyond the scope of performing whilst casting a spell simultaneously. Heck, as mentioned before, you can't even move 60ft (for your average Human) in 6 seconds whilst casting a "normal" spell. That's not that fast a speed to be travelling; I could roll a cigarette whilst walking that fast, but a spellcaster can't cast a spell at that pace.

No one "walks" at 11 km/h, that's a moderately fast jog. If you can do it whilst rolling a cigarette, kudos to you, but in game terms that means you are so practiced at it that you can do it as a bonus action. It's not a "free object interaction", certainly.

[JellyPooga]

No one "walks" at 11 km/h, that's a moderately fast jog. If you can do it whilst rolling a cigarette, kudos to you, but in game terms that means you are so practiced at it that you can do it as a bonus action. It's not a "free object interaction", certainly.

Whether or not I can walk at that pace, you rather prove my point. Rolling a cigarette is something that can be done whilst holding a conversation, or even opening a door (albeit with a slight pause); a lengthy task (i.e. longer than 6 seconds) that takes a certain amount of concentration that can be performed alongside other tasks easily enough. You assert that to be able to perform that task whilst ttaveling at a decent pace would be considered (in game terms) as some kind of sepcial training. Yet a level 20 Wizard can't cast even a cantrip whilst moving at that same pace (all other things being equal). That being the case, I'll assert that level of concentration is pretty significant and perhaps even obvious to an observer.

[TheUser]

Whether or not I can walk at that pace, you rather prove my point. Rolling a cigarette is something that can be done whilst holding a conversation, or even opening a door (albeit with a slight pause); a lengthy task (i.e. longer than 6 seconds) that takes a certain amount of concentration that can be performed alongside other tasks easily enough. You assert that to be able to perform that task whilst ttaveling at a decent pace would be considered (in game terms) as some kind of sepcial training. Yet a level 20 Wizard can't cast even a cantrip whilst moving at that same pace (all other things being equal). That being the case, I'll assert that level of concentration is pretty significant and perhaps even obvious to an observer.

How so?
Are they furrowing their brow? Clenching their facial muscles (like someone who is constipated)?

There's no penalties to any ability checks, movement, attacks, other spells being cast.

A PC can dash at full speed while concentrating on a spell or scale a cliff, heck you can literally RUN A MARATHON while concentrating on a spell.

The fact that concentration has no numerical impact on performing other actions would seem to indicate that it's not obvious at all.

[JellyPooga]

How so?
Are they furrowing their brow? Clenching their facial muscles (like someone who is constipated)?

There's no penalties to any ability checks, movement, attacks, other spells being cast.

A PC can dash at full speed while concentrating on a spell or scale a cliff, heck you can literally RUN A MARATHON while concentrating on a spell.

The fact that concentration has no numerical impact on performing other actions would seem to indicate that it's not obvious at all.

I'll say it again, I'm not talking about concentration to maintain a spell, I'm talking about concentrating to cast a spell. If it would take an action to perform a task during combat, you cannot cast a spell with a casting time of one action or more simultaneously.

How that concentration manifests is entirely dependent on the character in question. How does anyone concentrate in real life? One character might furrow his brow, the next might glow with an aura of power; that's your call as the player. All that matters is that there is a certain amount of effort involved in doing so. Enough effort to preclude other significant activity. Enough effort such that it may be obvious you're doing something and not nothing.

[TheUser]

I'll say it again, I'm not talking about concentration to maintain a spell, I'm talking about concentrating to cast a spell. If it would take an action to perform a task during combat, you cannot cast a spell with a casting time of one action or more simultaneously.

How that concentration manifests is entirely dependent on the character in question. How does anyone concentrate in real life? One character might furrow his brow, the next might glow with an aura of power; that's your call as the player. All that matters is that there is a certain amount of effort involved in doing so. Enough effort to preclude other significant activity. Enough effort such that it may be obvious you're doing something and not nothing.

Half of my point still remains; I can still jog, climb, swim, jump.

I can even maintain a grapple.

All of these without penalty.

[Willie the Duck]

Pretty much exactly what the description says. How subtle is a Subtle Spell? Is it covert enough that no one would know the sorcerer has used it? Is it literally no more than "the spell happens without somatic/verbal components," such that anyone can tell you still cast it?

I don't believe there are any "right" answers, though of course I have my preferred answers. This is more "how does this community feel about it" than anything else.

I think, provided you can just have your hand on your focus or touching a material component (as needed), the only way that anyone can tell you still cast it is if the consequences of the spell happening infer that it was you casting it (a fireball shoots from you to the opponent, spirit guardians appear around you). Of course only people familiar with said spell will be able to definitively intuit 'that's a self-only spell, they must have cast it.'

The spell effect, though, is likely to be, because an awful lot of spells are described as originating from you in some way. Including most damaging spells.

Sacred Flame, Toll the Dead, Call Lightning, and Flame Strike (hmm, lot of Celestial Sorcerer fodder here) being exceptions.
Regardless, overall it seems that making a subtle blaster sorcerer who doesn't identify themselves as 'the caster' and thus draw aggro seems not to have been the intended use. The subtle battle sorcerer would be the one casting buff spells (probably a better role for a sorcerer in general, although that sorcerer is making tough decisions compared to twinning their buffs, or the like). I have always considered the social/infiltrator role to be the best place for a subtle sorcerer. Casting a spell right before you _____ (enchant, illusion, stealth) oftentimes negates any value he spell might have provided because it calls out to the intended target that you are either 1) there in the first place, or 2) doing something special.

[Morollan]

I'll say it again, I'm not talking about concentration to maintain a spell, I'm talking about concentrating to cast a spell. If it would take an action to perform a task during combat, you cannot cast a spell with a casting time of one action or more simultaneously.

How that concentration manifests is entirely dependent on the character in question. How does anyone concentrate in real life? One character might furrow his brow, the next might glow with an aura of power; that's your call as the player. All that matters is that there is a certain amount of effort involved in doing so. Enough effort to preclude other significant activity. Enough effort such that it may be obvious you're doing something and not nothing.

I'm not sure where you even got this concept of concentrating to cast a spell? There are literally no rules for that or really any suggestion that there even is such a thing. You seem to be saying that because casting a spell is an action there must be some visual evidence of you taking that action but that seems to ignore what subtle spell does. It removes the most obvious visual tells from the action. I don't know why you would want to penalise a player by making him jump through more hoops based purely on this imagined concept.

[diplomancer]

"This person didn't do anything except walk and talk in the last 6 seconds, they are obviously casting a spell" will not get you far in a court of law, even in a magical world ;)

[VoxRationis]

"This person didn't do anything except walk and talk in the last 6 seconds, they are obviously casting a spell" will not get you far in a court of law, even in a magical world ;)

Well, not a fair court of law with reasonable standards for evidence, anyway. Lots of either codified or customary laws have had somewhat lower standards for burden of proof.

But yes, it sounds like JellyPooga is insisting that Subtle Spell, in spite of removing both visual and auditory cues as to the casting of a spell for the avowed purpose of making the spell, you know, subtle, does not actually do that. I would also argue that "concentration" in the non-technical sense is often rather difficult to notice. People don't necessarily squint and tense up all their muscles when they're mentally focusing on something; that's an element of artistic license to make TV and film more interesting to watch. Consider a classroom full of reasonably scholarly pupils. What does their focus look like? Well, not much, I would argue, and nothing that would be out of place in, say, an audience chamber.

[Damon_Tor]

It depends on the spell. If a bolt of lightning springs from you, it will be hard to convince that you were not involved in it.

Of course, humans (and I assume most other humanoids) do not perceive quickly enough to determine which end of the lighting is the origin and which end is the terminus. They just see a flash arcing from one location to another. You could use this to both fake your death and frame someone for your murder.

1. Make yourself look like lighting hit you. Burn your clothes, burn your hair, use a disguise kit to make your flesh look crispy, etc.
2. Cast Contingency: Feign Death. The condition is "I cast Lightning Bolt".
3. Use Disguise Self to hide the lightning-struck effects.
4. Exactly one hour later, stand 101 feet away from your target and get his attention, so he at least looks at you. An insult works well for our purposes.
5. Cast Lightning Bolt subtly in his direction, which triggers Feign Death. Disguise Self times out

You will be lying there, appearing to be dead, covered in horrific burns. Everyone will have seen the lightning, appearing to come from the target of the frame job. The obvious conclusion is that he is a sorcerer, and in his anger lashed out with his magic at a random heckler. Naturally the body will go missing later, something that will be blamed on the cover-up attempts of the targets allies in the coroner's office.

[Demonslayer666]

I'm not sure where you even got this concept of concentrating to cast a spell? There are literally no rules for that or really any suggestion that there even is such a thing. You seem to be saying that because casting a spell is an action there must be some visual evidence of you taking that action but that seems to ignore what subtle spell does. It removes the most obvious visual tells from the action. I don't know why you would want to penalise a player by making him jump through more hoops based purely on this imagined concept.

Probably from the Ready Action, you maintain concentration until the trigger.


@OP - Subtle Spell is not perceptible when the spell has V and S components only. If it has M, it depends on the accessibility of the M component. The way I play it, is you can't notice it if the material component is hidden and already in your pocket, or casually held (staff). Now, if you have to retrieve it from your component pouch, or get out your wand, then that can be noticed and subtle spell doesn't help - but I might let slight of hand work.

[sophontteks]

No. Casting a Subtle Spell is walking along without waving your arms around and holding a conversation. Casting a Subtle Spell lets you attempt to sneak in the first place, so to speak. It doesn't mean you automatically succeed. I can see where you're coming from with the resource expenditure, but what I see is that resource being spent to furnish the opportunity, not to hand the desired result on a plate. Bear in mind the other benefits, beyond deception, of Subtle Spell; casting whilst bound, or casting in an area of Silence or gagged, for example. These are "freebies" that are furnished by that resource. Deception is not, necessarily (or explicitly), granted (unless using XGtE, as conceded earlier).



To expand my list of "Things you can't do whilst casting a spell", then;

- You can't cast Alarm (casting time 1 minute) whilst searching for secret doors.
- I would not allow you to cast Awaken (casting time 8 hours) whilst foraging or drawing a map while traveling (couldn't find a specific reference for this one, so this is a personal GM-call).

The point is that spending your Action every round to cast a spell with a cast time of longer than one Action is also representative of precluding doing anything else of significance during that time. Whether you're in combat or not. You don't stop "spending your Action" just because you're out of combat; you're still expending the same effort to "cast a spell" for the duration of the casting time. Yes, you can walk around and generally interact, but at the same time you are also casting a spell, utilising your concentration to do so. It's worth bearing in mind that whilst simple activities and object interactions don't require an action (e.g. opening a door), more complex tasks e.g. something as simple as opening a stuck door (reference: PHB pg.190; Other Activity on your Turn) or doing two such things within the space of 6 seconds, would be beyond the scope of performing whilst casting a spell simultaneously. Heck, as mentioned before, you can't even move 60ft (for your average Human) in 6 seconds whilst casting a "normal" spell. That's not that fast a speed to be travelling; I could roll a cigarette whilst walking that fast, but a spellcaster can't cast a spell at that pace.

And what of the things that you can?

A caster can summersault away from a fireball, unsheath their sword, and parry away the attacks from several goblins all while running 30 feet, leaping over a ravine, and shouting "Death to the enemy" at the top of their lungs...

All within a 6 second timespan while they are using their action to cast a spell.

Again, you are confusing turn-based game mechanics. Everything in the game is happening real-time. The caster is never sitting motionlessly with a case of mental constipation. There is literally no tell.

EDIT: in response to what you can't do. Reactions happen within the same 6 second timespan, so add back in attacking and casting spells in reaction to the enemy.