The rules are clear on a spell that’s cast normally, that is with normal voice and gestures. It seems pretty clear if cast with subtle gestures or voice. The rules SEEM to say you can roll to detect the TeFo even if the caster is using no voice or gestures, it’s just hard. But I know for certain that my players would argue that if the caster is using no voice or gestures that the defender couldn’t know what is being cast. Probably the same for anything coming from a magic device. So is the intent that the defender can just sense the magic coming at him? How far does this go, can the defender sense magic from a source he can’t see? Can the defender sense magic coming from an Intagable Tunnel, effectively senseing it when it apears on his ‘side’ of the tunnel? Can he sense if coming from behind him? Can he sense if it targets his bloodline or any of the other ‘exotic’ target ranges? Can he sense it if he’s blind, but its in front of him using no voice?
My thought is that “no voice, no gestures, and subtle do not mean they are just standing there giving no indication. They may mouth the words they do not say or shape their hands into the proper forms for casting. subtle means weaving the words and gestures into another activity, so they do not stand out as “hey, this guy is casting a spell”. It isn’t someone apparently minding their own business glancing in your direction and a spell happens.
Whatever they are casting, their sigil will be manifesting in some way. Perhaps the sigil is subtly changed by the arts being used in a spell, so it could be possible to get a rough idea of what is being cast by observing the sigil. Doing this in a second and realising what you want to fast-cast in time - now that’s difficult, which is why the ease factors are so high.
The virtue Exotic Casting (HoH:S p107) makes it more difficult to identify what spell is being cast because observers unfamiliar with the caster’s tradition don’t recognize the same words and gestures taught as part of Hermetic Theory. However, using silent/still casting doesn’t have the same effect on the difficult to identify which spell is being cast. So, it would seem that the thing that identifies the spell being cast is more the familiarity with what is going on with the incipient spell, rather than the specific words and/or gestures.
I’d be inclined to take a visual cue from movie magic and say that it’s the SFX – Doctor Strange’s and Wong’s spells (and other similar MCU spellcasters – there’s a magic guy among the Ravagers in the GotG movies) look distinctly similar.
I have always thought that one reason for taking the -15 penalty is that it lets you cast a spell in front of mundanes without them being any the wiser (unless the spell itself has obvious effects). Losing that because the spell has obvious sigil-related effects seems a shame.
Just as there is a 15 penalty to cast the such a spell, there should be a 15 penalty to detect what is being cast.
This where I have always thought that Magic Sensitivity should help. I would allow a bonus equal to your score in Magic Sensitivity to identify the spell being cast.
Just as there is a 15 penalty to cast the such a spell, there should be a 15 penalty to detect what is being cast.
In effect there is. It’s automatic with standard gestures and voice, there’s a target number of 15 to detect it otherwise
This sounds right to me. Also, InVi sensory spells could also help a lot.
I too was thinking in the same lines where a nice Memtem eye effect without voice nor gestuals would leave mundane onlookers non-wiser. Initiated magic users can attempt their roll target 15 in order to see a trace of the sigil of the caster.
W
I think I would require a specific ability to do that, such as Magic Sensitivity, but ygmv.
I'm thinking there's a sensible minor flaw, perhaps called “blatant sigil”: even if you cast silently and without gestures, you sigil has a major effect so that everyone notices something magical has happened.
But every Flambeau would take it, so maybe it's not a good idea.
With a proper InVi effect or Magic Sensivity roll, if you have Magic theory, I think you do not need to roll to determine the TeFo.
W
Generally sigils should be self evident. For example if I have a sigil of “oranges’ and the spell goes off and there is a smell of citrus, that doesn’t require any magical sensitivity to notice.
Well, that's the point I was disputing above, because it seems to make voice-and-gesture-free casting not really work. But I’m not expecting everyone to agree.
I would disagree that it makes gesture and voice free not work- it works perfectly fine but does not guaruntee non-recgnition. If I cast gesture and voice free then a countering wiiiiizard still has a chance to counter my spell and notice ehich arts I used- which obviously means they could tell I was scasting. Similarly someone who does not notice that I am casting but notices the spell itself will likely notice my sigil, which only means somethin if they know what my sigil is. If you don’t know that i have a sigil of oranges then a citrus smell tells you nothing. If I use finesse to imitate a sigil that you do know while you do not know mine, you will likely assume the other magus is responsible.
Also worth noting, if I cast a spell with a ritual link from 20 miles away I am certain nobody at the location notices me casting but my sigil will still manifest. It is a completely different “chain of evidence” if you will. The same way that being invisible doesn’t keep me from being heard.