8
\$\begingroup\$

In Pathfinder second edition, does a spellcaster know the result of an enemy's save against their spell?

The game rules make it clear that when a player makes a check, they don't always get to know the DC they're testing against:

Sometimes you'll know the DC and make the comparison yourself. Other times, you might not know the DC right away. Swimming across a river would require an Athletics check, but it doesn't have a specified DC—so how will you know if you succeed or fail? You call out your result to the GM and they'll let you know if it's a success, failure, or otherwise. While you might learn the exact DC through trial and error, DCs sometimes change, so asking the GM whether a check is successful is best. (Player Core, p401)

However, neither the defenses against spells section nor the rules for making saving throws say exactly what the character causing a save should learn. Spell saves are generally not tagged as secret checks, but I'm not sure that would apply anyway (since it's an NPC making the save, not a PC).

In my experience at the table, the degree of success on the save has always been made clear by the GM (so that I can roll the right amount of damage or describe the other effects of the spell to them), but a fellow player suggested this may not be the Rules as Written.

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
8
\$\begingroup\$

There is no official rule on this

As far as I can tell, unlike in some other systems, there is no rule that states if the caster knows if a target failed its saving throw or not (or to what degree they succeeded or failed).

The spellcasting section merely directs you to the individual spells for describing what the effects of the saving throw are. And the spells where it is not obvious if you succeeded or not do not mention anything about wether you know.

For example, Charm has a save that determines the targets attitude, and talks about if the target knows you tried to charm it, but says nothing about if you know. A clever target that is aware of you tring to charm it could use that to its advantage, and deceive you acting as if it worked to find out what you are trying to do, until there is a good opportunity to reveal it did not work. The same goes for Suggestion, and Ring of Truth likewise and unlike in its D&D sibling zone of truth, has no text explicitly stating that you know if they made the save or not.

Unless the caster knows, several spells work a lot worse than if they wouldn't. In addtion to the examples above, things like Slow, Blindness, or Fear can range from no effect to widely varying duations, and knowing or not knowing how well they worked will have a big impact on planning your next tactical move, and thereby on how useful they are.

I think because of that, and because it is one less thing for the GM to secretly keep track of, most tables play it as if it is known. But in particular for influencing spells, I could see a GM handle it differently -- there is no clear Rules as Written statement against doing so.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.