Does Silence protect you from Blasphemy? Source, please.

[AnonymousPepper]

I need a quick rules adjudication because my DM's being a bit of a **** at the moment.

The DM's BBEG dropped Blasphemy on me, a kobold sorc6/incantatrix5. I immediately dropped a Celerity into Silence to protect myself.

Now I KNOW that [sonic] spells do not function in a Silence, but he doesn't believe me on it. So a source on this would be greaaaaat.

[Forrestfire]

It's in the last line of the spell. "This spell provides a defense against sonic or language-based attacks."

[AnonymousPepper]

But he's claiming that you don't actually need to hear it to be affected.

[Honest Tiefling]

If that were true, it wouldn't be a sonic based spell, as shown by the descriptor, which silence specifically provides a defense against.

[Arael666]

I'm siding with your DM on this one, the spell has an area of effect that is not related to the caster/speaker being heard.

As the srd states "Any nonevil creature within the area of a blasphemy spell suffers the following ill effects."

[ZamielVanWeber]

Blasphemy is sonic; it has the sonic descriptor. Silence explicitly protects you from sonic attacks; that is from attacks with the sonic descriptor. Hearing it is not relevant. Silence is explicit in its defense.

[Honest Tiefling]

I'm siding with your DM on this one, the spell has an area of effect that is not related to the caster/speaker being heard.

As the srd states "Any nonevil creature within the area of a blasphemy spell suffers the following ill effects."

But see the descriptor. Else, Deathward wouldn't protect from Wail of the Banshee, Finger of Death,or any other spell written this way. It'd be a pretty crappy spell.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Is your DM confusing this with the rules for sonic attacks? Blasphemy is not stopped by stuffing your ears as it is not mind-affecting. It is only stopped because Silence has a line that says it stops it.

[Yomega]

This boils down simply.

1. Blasphemy has the [sonic] tag and silence explicitly protects you. 100% RAW you win

2. If it were hearing the caster speak that had the effect it would be language dependent. This is how some sonic spells work on deaf creatures/objects. (deaf creatures not those magically warded from sonic tones)

3. As far as from a DM's perspective goes he made you use a somehow reactionary celerty and another prepaird spell to stop its effect, resources expended move on.

[AnonymousPepper]

Okay. I made no progress whatsoever, but at least I can console myself with being right. :smallmad:

Gah. I just don't enjoy being railroaded. I really don't. This week and last week have been awful for it - which is unusual for this group. Last week, it was a DC35 Will save against Confusion that I would have had to nat20 to beat; I only got out of that one by nat20ing the dispel check to get it off of me. This week, it's straight-up ignoring some super-explicit RAW because he realllllly wanted that Blasphemy to hit.

[Honest Tiefling]

Might I ask when and how you bring it up? Have you noticed that these effects happen if you believe to be going off of the rails? What do the other players think?

[AnonymousPepper]

Might I ask when and how you bring it up? Have you noticed that these effects happen if you believe to be going off of the rails? What do the other players think?

In this case, it was right when he told me that I'm still affected by it, I was like, wait, hold on a second, Silence says it doesn't work like that...

And no, it's not a case of us going off the rails - it was in the middle of a huge battle that's been the subject of three sessions thus far. It's just "I want this effect to happen to you, so it happens."

[atemu1234]

In this case, it was right when he told me that I'm still affected by it, I was like, wait, hold on a second, Silence says it doesn't work like that...

And no, it's not a case of us going off the rails - it was in the middle of a huge battle that's been the subject of three sessions thus far. It's just "I want this effect to happen to you, so it happens."

Might I ask why?

[Honest Tiefling]

I would raise a mild objection in game. Some DMs don't like to argue rules mid-game, as it could quickly derail a game where there isn't a lot of time. People also get caught up in the game and story, so they aren't always reasonable.

Try to speak with him about it out of the game, when both of you have time to calm down. Speak with the other players, to see if they have similar concerns.

[AnonymousPepper]

Might I ask why?

I haven't a clue why. He just decided that the save DC for that spell last week was going to be stupid high and the rules as written didn't matter this one time and I really can't see any benefit to either. Like the only effect that either would have had would have been to take me out of the fight - not being egocentric there or anything, that's actually the only effect there would have been.

[AnonymousPepper]

I would raise a mild objection in game. Some DMs don't like to argue rules mid-game, as it could quickly derail a game where there isn't a lot of time. People also get caught up in the game and story, so they aren't always reasonable.

Try to speak with him about it out of the game, when both of you have time to calm down. Speak with the other players, to see if they have similar concerns.

Well, when I left Teamspeak a couple minutes ago - no point in my sticking around, I was just going to go off on him eventually and besides I was paralyzed for ten minutes with the session due to end at 8 - he was busy trying to figure out if the rules allowed the party's barbarian to do something silly.

[Honest Tiefling]

If I had to guess, he was trying to establish the big bad...As a big bad. I mean, no one wants to fight a weakling! But...For curiosity's sake, do you out perform your peers?

Unless there's a history of this...I'd just let it slide. He could have a reason, he could have made a mistake, it could be a style thing. If the game has been fun, just give him the benefit of the doubt.

[AnonymousPepper]

If I had to guess, he was trying to establish the big bad...As a big bad. I mean, no one wants to fight a weakling! But...For curiosity's sake, do you out perform your peers?

She's not even the BBEG (she's the BBEG's daughter, actually). We're just in the middle of a big brawl and I'm trying to 1v1 her down.

And no, I don't. It's a high op game where I'm playing basically the Mailman on steroids and still getting outpaced in the direct damage department by a well-built Magus while the Archivist has his massive bag of "every divine spell in the game" tricks that's completely blown the door off of multiple scenarios. Which I'm not complaining about, for the record - that Archivist is magnificent.

[Honest Tiefling]

She might not be THE big bad, but I assume she's still supposed to be A big bad. Uh...If it is high OP, how is the DM doing in challenging your group?

[AnonymousPepper]

She might not be THE big bad, but I assume she's still supposed to be A big bad. Uh...If it is high OP, how is the DM doing in challenging your group?

Really, really well, actually, because the enemies are downright bonkers.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Really, really well, actually, because the enemies are downright bonkers.

How much is that via flagrantly cheating? Because we just witnessed some flagrant cheating.

[Honest Tiefling]

Bonkers as in, numbers are pumped up, or bonkers in, optimized to the point of being crazy good?

[Renen]

Heck, link the DM this thread.

[AnonymousPepper]

Bonkers as in, numbers are pumped up, or bonkers in, optimized to the point of being crazy good?

Bonkers as in they're largely technological, homebrewed, and draw inspiration from other universes (prominently, Warhammer, and not Warhammer Fantasy), and they're powerful enough to generally challenge us evenly without any actual cheating involved.

[Honest Tiefling]

Um...Is there a chance the guy might have felt...A bit threatened by you guys if you can optimize and play so well? It could also be that he thought the huge numbers were fine and assumed you guys would do just peachy regardless of the spell's success.

[AnonymousPepper]

Um...Is there a chance the guy might have felt...A bit threatened by you guys if you can optimize and play so well? It could also be that he thought the huge numbers were fine and assumed you guys would do just peachy regardless of the spell's success.

Most likely not. He's shown there's not really an upper limit to enemy power levels before. Previous game, there was a level 16 or so gunslinger who was tearing everything apart mercilessly because hitting touch AC. Sure enough, enemies with touch ACs in the high 20s to mid 30s started showing up...

What we run into is directly proportional to our own power levels. Usually.

[Renen]

So he just hardcounters? Booooo

[ZamielVanWeber]

The caster level of Blasphemy was 5 over their character levels (well, between 5-9). Aside from Silence and being Evil I don't know of any defense against Blasphemy, so that was pretty ridiculous IMO. It feels like the DM fully intends for them to lose this fight.

[Honest Tiefling]

Honestly, sounds like a mistake, and that the guy is doing well to engage you AND challenge you. Again, I must suggest letting it slide if the game is good. Seems like his grasp of the rules isn't as good as others, but he runs a good game otherwise and is at least open to ideas. Perhaps suggest to him a rule that if looking up rules takes too long, the DM makes a ruling...That only applies to that one instance. Future uses of the same trick require backing in terms of rules. This way, the game can go much smoother?

[ZamielVanWeber]

Tiefling is way less judgmental than I am right now. Listen to his words of wisdom.

[Deophaun]

Aside from Silence and being Evil I don't know of any defense against Blasphemy.
Spellblade.
Being able to hit a Bluff DC of 70.

[Renen]

The worst part isnt the DM not knowing the rules, its the DM not admitting he is wrong when shown proof.

[Honest Tiefling]

The worst part isnt the DM not knowing the rules, its the DM not admitting he is wrong when shown proof.

I don't like it...But I'm willing to bet everyone's done it at least once in their lives as well.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Spellblade.
Being able to hit a Bluff DC of 70.

One of those seems relevant to the average character. I also forgot you can try to counter the Blasphemy, for what it is worth.

[nedz]

Aside from Silence and being Evil I don't know of any defense against Blasphemy.


Aligned Planar Terrain Mastery — Horizon Walker 6+

[Forrestfire]

Spellblade.
Being able to hit a Bluff DC of 70.

Spellblades only work on targeted spells.

[Riculf]

I'd rule that the casting of the spell is "Sonic" (calling down your God's wrath on the impure, etc). As long as the God in question can "hear" the call, the spell works.

The effects of the spell have no sonic component as they are just the power of the God working through their intermediary (the caster). This would affect everyone in range regardless of silence/line of sight/etc.

[kellbyb]

I'd rule that the casting of the spell is "Sonic" (calling down your God's wrath on the impure, etc). As long as the God in question can "hear" the call, the spell works.

The effects of the spell have no sonic component as they are just the power of the God working through their intermediary (the caster). This would affect everyone in range regardless of silence/line of sight/etc.

Under that reasoning, aren't all spells with a verbal component "sonic"?

[Chronos]

The spell requiring that "your god hear you" or whatever would just be it having a verbal component. Which most spells do. The effect of the spell, though, is sonic, as evidenced by the [sonic] tag. You could even modify Blasphemy with the Silent Spell metamagic, which would have the effect that the caster wouldn't need to utter a thing, but would still magically produce the sound of an unholy word.

Incidentally, Word of Chaos and Holy Word both do require that the victims be able to hear them, while Blasphemy and Dictum do not. I'm not sure what the reason is for this asymmetry, which means that a deaf Lawful Evil character is immune to all four.

Oh, and all four of these spells also allow spell resistance, so that's another possible defense.

[Khedrac]

It's also worth noting that a number of later sonic effects (spells and creature abilities) specify that silence "merely" gives a bonus on the saving throw (usually +10 to +20 iirc). Personally I think this would be a good change to make to Blasphemy etc., but it is definitely a change. There is also an argument that the banishment effect will not be stopped by Silence, but that is a separate discussion.

As for ways to counter the Blasphemy, it also means that bardic countersong should work, but that would required a readied action or a bard pre-singing against Blasphemy just in case.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Blasphemy doesn't normally allow for a save; that is what makes it so potent.

[Chronos]

Quoth Khedrac:

It's also worth noting that a number of later sonic effects (spells and creature abilities) specify that silence "merely" gives a bonus on the saving throw (usually +10 to +20 iirc).
Examples? I don't think I've ever encountered this.

[Khedrac]

Examples? I don't think I've ever encountered this.

I may be semi-wrong on this one. I know we encountered at least one effect like this whilst playing the Savage Tide adventure path (I think) from Dungeon, but that's not WotC. I thought I had seen such stats written down somewhere, but since I do not recall where I am probably misremembering.

[Sewercop]

I'd rule that the casting of the spell is "Sonic" (calling down your God's wrath on the impure, etc). As long as the God in question can "hear" the call, the spell works.

The effects of the spell have no sonic component as they are just the power of the God working through their intermediary (the caster). This would affect everyone in range regardless of silence/line of sight/etc.

And here we might have the defending gm .....

[Deophaun]

I'd rule that the casting of the spell is "Sonic" (calling down your God's wrath on the impure, etc). As long as the God in question can "hear" the call, the spell works.
This is ableist discrimination against deaf gods.

[dascarletm]

I'd rule that the casting of the spell is "Sonic" (calling down your God's wrath on the impure, etc). As long as the God in question can "hear" the call, the spell works.

The effects of the spell have no sonic component as they are just the power of the God working through their intermediary (the caster). This would affect everyone in range regardless of silence/line of sight/etc.

Naw, The verbal component is the god hearing the request. The sonic part is the diety being all like:

evil caster gal: "EVIL GOD! Make these goodies stop harshing my mellow!":smallyuk:
EVIL GOD: "Hey you good... peeps stop being so good and stuff. You should like stop living.":smallbiggrin:
-10HD good guy: "Oh that makes sense. Bleah!" :smallfrown: *Dies*
-5HD good person: "ohmygawsh that's skary! Im stand here without mooobing nowz.":smalleek:
-1HD good dude: "EVIL GOD? uuuhhhggg arguing with you is sooo tiring...":smallsigh:
sameHD good friend: "Huh? what? ah! that's EVIL GOD... oh! right the fight my bad bros!":smallwink:
moreHD good bro: "Pshh, yeah right I'm not doing that!":smallcool:

So as you can see by my astute analysis this could not work in an area of silence.

[Lord of Shadows]

Since Blasphemy didn't exist until 3.x, and is a direct descendant of Unholy Word, it should work the same as Holy Word. Unfortunately, Holy Word is worded in a way that Blasphemy is not.


Holy Word: "Any nongood creature within the area that hears the holy word suffers the following ill effects."


Blasphemy: "Any nonevil creature within the area of a blasphemy spell suffers the following ill effects."

However, the secondary effect of both is worded exactly the same:


"This effect takes place regardless of whether the creatures hear the holy word."

"This effect takes place regardless of whether the creatures hear the blasphemy."

There should probably be a bit of Errata done here... Since there is No Save, preventing Silence as a defense against Blasphemy seems to make it more powerful than a 7th level spell. It certainly makes it more powerful than Holy Word, which should not normally be the case if they are intended to be opposites. Unless Blasphemy was intended by the designers to be more powerful than Holy Word for some reason.

However, in this case, it seems like the DM/GM is being bull-headed and stubborn, which can have many causes. Show your DM this thread, make him/her squirm in their seat.