Fix Silence

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

I was just watching Casual Veteran Gamer fight the Harpies, and he used a scroll of Silence around a character that was Lured but it didn't end the Lured condition (which it should since that character can no longer hear the song).

Silence is currently broken. (While you're at it, make sure it stops casters from casting spells with verbal components).

[Jack Hawklight]

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

Messaggio originale di Funniesthobo:

This is just getting to be a ridiculous debate. If you are only under the influence of the spell while you can hear the song, then not hearing it should stop its affects. I would understand charm being maintained in silence, as it was cast before the bubble so it doesn't really matter if you are hearing it or not. You are under the spell.

But for a spell which requires you to hear it continuously in order for it to affect the character, silence should break the spell.

One, Luring Song is not a spell. It's an innate spell-like ability of the harpy. Two, the second sentence in the description makes it clear that it can only affect those who can hear it, and this is further reinforced by the fact that the harpy must spend a bonus action (to continue singing) in order to maintain it's effect.

At best, one could argue that the effect isn't technically removed until the start of the charmed character's next turn, but then that's all that really matters anyway. I suppose it could also be argued that Silence only temporarily suppresses the effect instead of removing it (so that, for example, should the character move out of the zone of Silence, then they would immediately become charmed again without an additional saving throw since they already failed it before, and now the charm is simply 'reinstated') however I do no buy that argument either and I would require that character to make a new saving throw.

In any case, I know I am right because this is how Silence has always worked against effects that attack you through your sense of hearing and it's always made one immune from the siren's song as long as I've been playing D&D and will continue to do so. This is one of the primary reasons the spell was created.

I don't really care about the difference between a spell and a spell-like ability. Second, I was agreeing with you. I have no idea why you are trying to argue with me. This should just be such an obvious thing. Can't hear the song, can't be affected by it. They need to fix it.

[Linde]

And I am not disagreeing that silence being able to handle harpy song in other ways would be an improvement of the game. Silence is a situational spell that could use a buff, but it isn't a bug. My main problem with the argument presented is that it presents this issue as a bug rather than a situation where an improvement of silence would enhance the fun of the game allowing players extra options to find alternative strategies within a combat encounter.
(last post on this subject as I think I have said all I want on this matter)

[Jack Hawklight]

Messaggio originale di Linde:

And I am not disagreeing that silence being able to handle harpy song in other ways would be an improvement of the game. Silence is a situational spell that could use a buff, but it isn't a bug. My main problem with the argument presented is that it presents this issue as a bug rather than a situation where an improvement of silence would enhance the fun of the game allowing players extra options to find alternative strategies within a combat encounter.
(last post on this subject as I think I have said all I want on this matter)

Whether it is working as intended or not (bug). It still needs to be changed. Can't hear the song, it doesn't affect you. Simple and easy.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Messaggio originale di Funniesthobo:

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

One, Luring Song is not a spell. It's an innate spell-like ability of the harpy. Two, the second sentence in the description makes it clear that it can only affect those who can hear it, and this is further reinforced by the fact that the harpy must spend a bonus action (to continue singing) in order to maintain it's effect.

At best, one could argue that the effect isn't technically removed until the start of the charmed character's next turn, but then that's all that really matters anyway. I suppose it could also be argued that Silence only temporarily suppresses the effect instead of removing it (so that, for example, should the character move out of the zone of Silence, then they would immediately become charmed again without an additional saving throw since they already failed it before, and now the charm is simply 'reinstated') however I do no buy that argument either and I would require that character to make a new saving throw.

In any case, I know I am right because this is how Silence has always worked against effects that attack you through your sense of hearing and it's always made one immune from the siren's song as long as I've been playing D&D and will continue to do so. This is one of the primary reasons the spell was created.

I don't really care about the difference between a spell and a spell-like ability. Second, I was agreeing with you. I have no idea why you are trying to argue with me. This should just be such an obvious thing. Can't hear the song, can't be affected by it. They need to fix it.

Oh, I see. Sorry.

The distinction between spells and spell like abilities is often important, however, because spells often have a "fire and forget" like quality to them (if they are not concentration based) with a duration. So, for example, you can charm someone with Charm Person/Monster, and then go do something else and as long as you don't break the conditions of the spell (do damage to the charmed, etc.) it continues to work. Innate spell-like abilities are always treated as bespoke one-offs that do not conform to the generalized rules of spellcasting, they always just do exactly what their description says.

In any case, I am then confused by this statement you made:

I would understand charm being maintained in silence, as it was cast before the bubble so it doesn't really matter if you are hearing it or not. You are under the spell.

Because it sounds like you're arguing that the Lured effect should remain, even if the target is inside the zone of Silence (which is incorrect, it should be removed).

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Messaggio originale di Linde:

And I am not disagreeing that silence being able to handle harpy song in other ways would be an improvement of the game. Silence is a situational spell that could use a buff, but it isn't a bug. My main problem with the argument presented is that it presents this issue as a bug rather than a situation where an improvement of silence would enhance the fun of the game allowing players extra options to find alternative strategies within a combat encounter.
(last post on this subject as I think I have said all I want on this matter)

Whether it's a 'bug' or a simple oversight in that they didn't implement it correctly the first time isn't really the point. A bug is an error in the code, an oversight might just be a hasty implementation that needs to be corrected.

Either way, you're wrong about how Luring Song and Silence work. They work exactly as I have said they do, and they always have. I am speaking from precedent as well as a clearer understanding of the abilities description.

[Jack Hawklight]

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

In any case, I am then confused by this statement you made:

I would understand charm being maintained in silence, as it was cast before the bubble so it doesn't really matter if you are hearing it or not. You are under the spell.

Because it sounds like you're arguing that the Lured effect should remain, even if the target is inside the zone of Silence (which is incorrect, it should be removed).

No. I said charmed as in the spell charm person. Or whatever it is called. Not the harpy's song. I don't believe that spell requires constantly hearing the caster to stay in effect. I might be wrong about that though and if they do have to hear the caster to remain charmed, then once again, silence should break it. But my understanding was that you just cast charm person and then they are charmed till they make a successful saving throw.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Messaggio originale di Funniesthobo:

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

In any case, I am then confused by this statement you made:



Because it sounds like you're arguing that the Lured effect should remain, even if the target is inside the zone of Silence (which is incorrect, it should be removed).

No. I said charmed as in the spell charm person. Or whatever it is called. Not the harpy's song. I don't believe that spell requires constantly hearing the caster to stay in effect. I might be wrong about that though and if they do have to hear the caster to remain charmed, then once again, silence should break it. But my understanding was that you just cast charm person and then they are charmed till they make a successful saving throw.

Oh, I see what you're saying now. Yeah, interestingly, Charm Person requires the target to be in visual range (but doesn't require that the target can actually see you so you could, for example, charm a blind creature) and also requires a verbal component (so if you were in the zone of Silence, you couldn't cast it, but it would still work on your target if they were in the zone of Silence since it doesn't specifically require the target can hear, only that they are visible to you and within 30 ft.)

Charm Person lasts for 1 hour or until you or your companions harm it. The funny part about that is that "companion" and "harm" are not really defined. I mean, if I Charm a monster and then some guy I met for 5 minutes yesterday walks up and smacks it, does that guy count as a "companion"? Also, if I make consistently bad decisions that results in continual "harm" to the charmed monster (like leading it into traps) does that count as "harming" it? What if I charm two monsters and instigate a fight between them (charm doesn't let you command them, so you'd have to manipulate them into it)? Would they both remain charmed because neither are my "companions"?

[Jack Hawklight]

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

Messaggio originale di Funniesthobo:

No. I said charmed as in the spell charm person. Or whatever it is called. Not the harpy's song. I don't believe that spell requires constantly hearing the caster to stay in effect. I might be wrong about that though and if they do have to hear the caster to remain charmed, then once again, silence should break it. But my understanding was that you just cast charm person and then they are charmed till they make a successful saving throw.

Oh, I see what you're saying now. Yeah, interestingly, Charm Person requires the target to be in visual range (but doesn't require that the target can actually see you so you could, for example, charm a blind creature) and also requires a verbal component (so if you were in the zone of Silence, you couldn't cast it, but it would still work on your target if they were in the zone of Silence since it doesn't specifically require the target can hear, only that they are visible to you and within 30 ft.)

Yeah, that is more along the lines of what I meant. If the character has charm person put on them, they can go in the bubble and still remain charmed. Because they aren't required to hear anything. The harpy's song does require you to hear something and would not penetrate the sphere meaning the character should basically instantly come to their senses once in the sphere and you will have control of them again.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Messaggio originale di Funniesthobo:

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

Oh, I see what you're saying now. Yeah, interestingly, Charm Person requires the target to be in visual range (but doesn't require that the target can actually see you so you could, for example, charm a blind creature) and also requires a verbal component (so if you were in the zone of Silence, you couldn't cast it, but it would still work on your target if they were in the zone of Silence since it doesn't specifically require the target can hear, only that they are visible to you and within 30 ft.)

Yeah, that is more along the lines of what I meant. If the character has charm person put on them, they can go in the bubble and still remain charmed. Because they aren't required to hear anything. The harpy's song does require you to hear something and would not penetrate the sphere meaning the character should basically instantly come to their senses once in the sphere and you will have control of them again.

Yes, once successfully cast, charm spells typically only require that you (or your "companions") do no harm that creature.

The harpy's song is obviously meant to work only when victims can hear it. It literally says this when the harpy uses the ability and characters have to make a saving throw, heavily implies it when it mentions that the harpy must maintain the effect with a bonus action (which is used to continue singing obviously), but the real nail in the coffin is that Luring Song says the effect ends when the song ends and the song ends when you can no longer hear it.

Why? Because it doesn't say that the effect ends when the harpy stops singing (although this would be a specific case, under all normal circumstances, where it would also end). Being incapacitated is one illustrative example of how the effect could end (because the harpy obviously cannot continue to produce the song while incapacitated, thus ending it), but it doesn't imply it is the only way the song can end.

The problem this person arguing with me is having is distinguishing between the idea of "the song ending" and "the harpy stops singing". They are not one and the same event. The song can end for anyone who stops hearing it, regardless of what the harpy herself is doing, and regardless of whether the song has ended for any other characters can hear it, because no longer being able to hear something is the "end" of hearing it for that character.

Therefore it stands to reason that the "end" of the song could be different for each character, depending upon that character's individual circumstances. It may "end" for one character, and not for another.

And therefore, being inside a bubble of Silence should end the Lured debuff, but currently it does not. That's RAW.

[Jack Hawklight]

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

Messaggio originale di Funniesthobo:

Yeah, that is more along the lines of what I meant. If the character has charm person put on them, they can go in the bubble and still remain charmed. Because they aren't required to hear anything. The harpy's song does require you to hear something and would not penetrate the sphere meaning the character should basically instantly come to their senses once in the sphere and you will have control of them again.

Yes, once successfully cast, charm spells typically only require that you (or your "companions") do no harm that creature.

The harpy's song is obviously meant to work only when victims can hear it. It literally says this when the harpy uses the ability and characters have to make a saving throw, heavily implies it when it mentions that the harpy must maintain the effect with a bonus action (which is used to continue singing obviously), but the real nail in the coffin is that Luring Song says the effect ends when the song ends and the song ends when you can no longer hear it.

Why? Because it doesn't say that the effect ends when the harpy stops singing (although this would be a specific case, under all normal circumstances, where it would also end). Being incapacitated is one illustrative example of how the effect could end (because the harpy obviously cannot continue to produce the song while incapacitated, thus ending it), but it doesn't imply it is the only way the song can end.

The problem this person arguing with me is having is distinguishing between the idea of "the song ending" and "the harpy stops singing". They are not one and the same event. The song can end for anyone who stops hearing it, regardless of what the harpy herself is doing, and regardless of whether the song has ended for any other characters can hear it, because no longer being able to hear something is the "end" of hearing it for that character.

Therefore it stands to reason that the "end" of the song could be different for each character, depending upon that character's individual circumstances. It may "end" for one character, and not for another.

And therefore, being inside a bubble of Silence should end the Lured debuff, but currently it does not. That's RAW.

Yeah, I read some of the posts, I could see what was happening. But with walls of text. To me it is an obvious thing. If you can't hear in the silence sphere and someone under the effect of a song they must continue to hear in able for the effect to persist enters the sphere, then this would stop the effect of the song on the character. Simple, easy. Larian should make it so. Why? Because it will make the game more fun and provide additional strategies.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Messaggio originale di Funniesthobo:

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

Yes, once successfully cast, charm spells typically only require that you (or your "companions") do no harm that creature.

The harpy's song is obviously meant to work only when victims can hear it. It literally says this when the harpy uses the ability and characters have to make a saving throw, heavily implies it when it mentions that the harpy must maintain the effect with a bonus action (which is used to continue singing obviously), but the real nail in the coffin is that Luring Song says the effect ends when the song ends and the song ends when you can no longer hear it.

Why? Because it doesn't say that the effect ends when the harpy stops singing (although this would be a specific case, under all normal circumstances, where it would also end). Being incapacitated is one illustrative example of how the effect could end (because the harpy obviously cannot continue to produce the song while incapacitated, thus ending it), but it doesn't imply it is the only way the song can end.

The problem this person arguing with me is having is distinguishing between the idea of "the song ending" and "the harpy stops singing". They are not one and the same event. The song can end for anyone who stops hearing it, regardless of what the harpy herself is doing, and regardless of whether the song has ended for any other characters can hear it, because no longer being able to hear something is the "end" of hearing it for that character.

Therefore it stands to reason that the "end" of the song could be different for each character, depending upon that character's individual circumstances. It may "end" for one character, and not for another.

And therefore, being inside a bubble of Silence should end the Lured debuff, but currently it does not. That's RAW.

Yeah, I read some of the posts, I could see what was happening. But with walls of text. To me it is an obvious thing. If you can't hear in the silence sphere and someone under the effect of a song they must continue to hear in able for the effect to persist enters the sphere, then this would stop the effect of the song on the character. Simple, easy. Larian should make it so. Why? Because it will make the game more fun and provide additional strategies.

Yep, and also because that's the rules. That's how these spells/abilities work. That's RAW.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Messaggio originale di masamune73:

Look, pandariuskairos, people here debate this subject as well
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/184960/does-the-effect-of-luring-song-of-a-harpy-end-raw-when-the-affected-character-st
And the answer is it's up to DM. So it's up to Larian in our case.

Yeah, I've actually read that conversation.

[Linde]

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

Messaggio originale di Linde:

And I am not disagreeing that silence being able to handle harpy song in other ways would be an improvement of the game. Silence is a situational spell that could use a buff, but it isn't a bug. My main problem with the argument presented is that it presents this issue as a bug rather than a situation where an improvement of silence would enhance the fun of the game allowing players extra options to find alternative strategies within a combat encounter.
(last post on this subject as I think I have said all I want on this matter)

Either way, you're wrong about how Luring Song and Silence work. They work exactly as I have said they do, and they always have. I am speaking from precedent as well as a clearer understanding of the abilities description.

Nope. Having the ability to apply pseudo scientific musings about how sound travels to a set of rules that are clearly defined doesn't grant you a clearer understanding of the abilities description, it just enable you to read stuff into the rules that aren't there.

Any day of the week I would listen to the D&D lead rules designer telling people to stop reading stuff into the rules, rather than being swayed by your pseudo scientific musings about how sound travels and effects therefore must end.

You talk about silence always having worked the same way, then why has the spell description changed beyond just updating relevant keywords to new editions?
Silence in 3.5 had multiple specific effects described and is probably what you're mistaken with 5e silence. Silence in 4e was a -10 perception modifier to being listened in on. Silence in 5e is 3 specific effects that sadly doesn't counter luring song in many ways.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Messaggio originale di Linde:

Messaggio originale di pandariuskairos:

Either way, you're wrong about how Luring Song and Silence work. They work exactly as I have said they do, and they always have. I am speaking from precedent as well as a clearer understanding of the abilities description.

Nope. Having the ability to apply pseudo scientific musings about how sound travels to a set of rules that are clearly defined doesn't grant you a clearer understanding of the abilities description, it just enable you to read stuff into the rules that aren't there.

Any day of the week I would listen to the D&D lead rules designer telling people to stop reading stuff into the rules, rather than being swayed by your pseudo scientific musings about how sound travels and effects therefore must end.

You talk about silence always having worked the same way, then why has the spell description changed beyond just updating relevant keywords to new editions?
Silence in 3.5 had multiple specific effects described and is probably what you're mistaken with 5e silence. Silence in 4e was a -10 perception modifier to being listened in on. Silence in 5e is 3 specific effects that sadly doesn't counter luring song in many ways.

My attempt to explain things to you through how sound propagation works was an attempt to reach you by alternative means since you seem to be immune to reason and logic.

The fact remains that Silence and Luring Song work (according to RAW and RAI) the way I have told you they work.

Your interpretation is incorrect, and seems to be based on the continual confusion you have over equating "the song ends" with "the harpy stops singing".

The song can "end" whether the harpy stops singing or not. That's a fact.

[Jack Hawklight]

And so it continues.....