Glowy lights, Spellcraft and spell recognition.

[miltonyorkcastle]

Consistency, my dear Dorg, is quite important. (and you, of all people, are keenly aware of that)

But anywho, the point behind the request is to avoid a situation like the following:

Two mages and a fighter stand in a clearing.

P1-Talk: "Ooo, colorful glowing lights floating around you. Can you cast that on me, too?"

P2 to P1-Tell: "Hey, dude, you can't really see those things floating around my character. They're OOC."

P3-Talk: "Sure thing. Then we can be glowy together. *giggles*"

P1 to P2-Tell: "Who told you that? I can see them, you can see them, everyone can see them. They must be IC."

P2 to P1-Tell: "Just because you see it on the screen doesn't mean it's actually there."

P1 to P3-Talk: "/// hey, can I see the glowy lights floating around you from your spells?"

P3-Talk: "Um, yeah."

P2-Talk: "///No, he can't see them; the visuals are OOC."

I think you know where this is going..... right back here to this forum.

Like you've said, Dorg, some of the visuals make sense to have, some don't. And making a decision on which ones do and don't is a much bigger task than we want to tackle right now.

So, from what I'm getting, the "official" answer is:

"We don't want to say that all visuals represented IG count, or that none count. Also, since we don't have the time to define whether each effect should be there or not, just go ahead an role play it however you want."

[ycleption]

To be honest, I don't think it's terribly important.

To give the situation that precipitated my question, and why I do think it is important: npc who had cast spells like hold person during an encounter, cast Wail. Now, if Drexia had been able to realize that was what was being cast, she would have felt fully justified in attacking said npc in defense of others. I assumed that she had no knowledge that the spell differed from what she had previously cast. Another character, assuming that he could recognize the spell, was very confused as to why nobody reacted...

So, to me, as it affects character decisions, it does have quite a bit of impact.
And yeah, I'm with milty, I don't really care which way it is, just a decision one way or the other would be nice (or even some general guidelines for RPing the matter).

[Dorganath]

So, from what I'm getting, the "official" answer is:

"We don't want to say that all visuals represented IG count, or that none count. Also, since we don't have the time to define whether each effect should be there or not, just go ahead an role play it however you want."

Works for me, assuming some degree of common sense is applied.

So, to me, as it affects character decisions, it does have quite a bit of impact.

I was referring to whether or not the visual effects that may have be more OOC than IC were displayed.

Not knowing Weird was cast, your character probably reacted appropriately. It's going to depend a lot on the spell.  Some would have effects visible to all (Fireball, IGMS, etc.) while others would not (Phant. Killer, Weird, etc.) unless they were cast upon or affected by them.

[LightlyFrosted]

As a purely IC note, I've always assumed that most of the flashies or glowing stuff were related to the fact that spellcasters are making natural forces do things they wouldn't normally do.  Just as even the really good rocket scientists can't turn rocket fuel directly into thrust without having some spillage with light, sound, heat, etc., casters are turning magical energy into whatever effect they desire - with some waste-energy going into visual or auditory effects.

There really is no reason why stoneskin or barkskin should be exceptions to the 'no manifestation' rule if nothing else is.  One could just as easily say that Stoneskin just toughens your skin to such a degree that it can turn away a blade, and for barkskin - well, there's no appreciable difference between barkskin and any other natural armour.

Generally as a rule of thumb, evocation should almost always be seen - it's powerful flashy magic - transmutation should be seen whenever its effects are inescapably visual - that man just turned into a dragon, but he still looks like a man?.  Arbjuration is largely at the discretion of those watching, and may vary dependent on the spell, although one imagines that it's a trifle more subtle.

Enchantment effects MIGHT be noticed by someone who's especially observant.  They've got a glazed look to their eyes, or they're acting out of character.  Illusions are by their very nature somewhat visual in nature - or invisible, as the case may be, but there are a few rare exceptions where these manifestations are only visible to select people.  Conjuration is, of course, visible unless you're conjuring an invisible stalker or something.  Necromancy varies, but if it walks like a ghoul, and talks like a ghoul, chances are, it's a ghoul.  A VISIBLE ghoul.  And Divination could really go either way, although someone in-tune enough with the Al'noth would probably be able to detect someone scanning them.

Just my two cents.

[Gulnyr]

Define "detect"?

I can expand on the idea.

If we are on a hypothetical quest and the GM asks for a Spellcraft check on an object, or even just says, "You're a mage so you can sense this," then Connor knows the object is magical and Jennara doesn't.  Jennara can't detect magic that isn't obvious in some way and has to rely on the magically inclined to tell her there is magic.  If it doesn't glow from within or make a lot of fire or alter the way she feels somehow, or whatever, then she's "blind" to the magic in it.  Connor can probably detect it, sense it, feel it without thinking too much about it the same way you and I feel the wind blowing or hear the dog barking three houses down.  It's like another sense, one that's been trained, one that "mundane" people don't have.  Much like certain Rogues know what to look for so they can spot traps that others may blindly cross, those wise in the ways of magic know what to "look" for when it comes to magic that others may miss completely.  

If it does something that is visible to normal, everyday senses, then it's detectable by non-mages.  If it only does something to the winds of magic and doesn't otherwise produce an effect that can be perceived through normal, everyday means, then it isn't detectable by non-mages.

See it being cast?

I wasn't really considering the casting effects, but I can see how that ties in.  If there should be an obvious visual, auditory, or other effect that "normal" people could detect with their regular senses during the casting of a spell, then yes, everyone can detect that.  Maybe fire spells tend to cause casters' hands to blaze up during the casting process, for example.  Everyone can see fire.  That could be pretty intimidating and might be considered a bonus, even.  But would every spell have a flashy "light show" around the caster that "normal" people could see?  That seems a little over the top.  Maybe magic is ostentatious like that, though.  I can imagine that someone who knew what to look for (aka had the right skill(s)) could sense magic swirling, coalescing, or somehow gathering around or being manipulated by a caster during the casting of any spell, but that isn't something a "normal" person would detect.

See its persistent visual effect (if any)?

This goes back to the other two paragraphs.  If there is something "normal" people could see or otherwise sense, they should see or otherwise sense it.  If there isn't, then they shouldn't.  Maybe magic requires flashy lights...

Is there any particular reason feet have to glow to be free?  Could mages sense Freedom of Movement?  Probably.  Maybe they have to focus and try to detect it or something, but sure.  Is there any reason Francisco Fighter should just be able to look at Tilly Tapdancer and know she has magical enhancement on her feet?  I don't think so, but maybe there's something I don't know.  He's just a Fighter, after all.  If Tilly isn't doing something to demonstrate the effect, how could he sense it, assuming it doesn't have to glow?  Like Haste.  Haste doesn't glow.  If a highly disciplined hasted person stands still, how would anyone but a caster trying to feel the magic around that person know?  Well, maybe the very keen eyed and eared, but people with such keen senses aren't "normal" and that's not really the point, anyway.

I don't think there's any reason to try to change anything with NWN, which is why I said maybe it was something to consider for the MMO.  Mages can sense magic and "mundane" people can't, unless the magic happens to be flashy or otherwise creates some obvious effect.  If a spell shouldn't have an obvious effect that the common crowd can sense, don't give it one.  I am, of course, assuming in all of this that there is something special to detect (which seems to be the case, else Jennara could sense magic from all sorts of objects on quests, too) and that magic doesn't have to be unnecessarily flashy, which seems especially inappropriate for natural magic.

I think it's mostly a small thing, though having a consensus would be nice.  To echo Script Wrecked, there have been a lot of times I've wished magic was mostly only visible to the magically trained, since I would like to see something besides a pack of glowing bubbles on the screen.  The best screenshots don't have hamster balls, heh.

[lonnarin]

It's rather fun playing a spellcaster with zero spellcraft.  Take rangers for example, for us it is crossclass and very few pureclass rangers are likely to ever place a single point into spellcraft.  Yet after a few levels, we start casting magic spells.  What does Earl with a -1 intelligence modifier and untrained in spellcraft think of all of this?

"Whoah!  I got super powers, man!  Look at this... *clenches his fists and strains as the barkskin covers him* Ahm Treant-man! Rraargh! *stomp stomp stomp* smash defiler ah trees!"

Kor the orc shaman of Grand also has spellcraft untrained.  For him, he only knows that he prays to Grand and that his god does it directly.  So he's always talking to his god like an invisible friend.  He has to be right there with him, of course, if he can see and hear Kor and is casting things for him.  There's no comprehension of Al'Noth, only religious fundamentalism and faith.  Me not cast "divine hammer", Grand smash you with claw!  Cast "Bull's Strength?"  bah, bull not make strong.  Grand make you strong!

Now as far as Bjorn the 2 century old dwarf who for the past century has had Skabot cast spells on him before battle, yeah, he knows what a stoneskin is when he sees it.  I'd just as soon default to my Lore skill for things encountered every day.  Spellcraft would entail knowing the how and why of knowing, Lore the what.

You need not be a trained and licensed technician to know what a television is or how to turn it on or use even use the remote control.  Only if you expect to take it apart, fix it or build a new one properly will you need to bother with knowledge of its inner workings.  But any recognizes brand names like Sony, Sanyo, Hitachi, etc. as they have seen and owned and watched them before!  They just don't know how to rewire a circuitboard or create an LCD panel.

That's the difference between basic Lore and Spellcraft.

Earl has *neither* so he really thinks he gained super powers and is therefore an action hero.  Plus the drinking modifier drops both skills down to -3  

Also remember, Spellcraft allows one to identify spells AS they're being cast, not afterwards.  So a mage casting a fireball, you would be taken off guard if you couldn't tell what he was casting.  But a wizard looking at him, listening to what he''s chanting and feeling the Al'noth energies swirling around him could scream "Duck everyone, it's a fireball!" before it is cast.  Likewise, after the fighter gets struck with a fireball, he has a pretty good chance of realiizing, "ow, he hit me with a fireball" versus "oi! what was that, a divine hammer? angry badger swarm?".  He saw a fireball... he felt it.  He just didn't see it coming till it was too late.