It is difficult to encapsulate the magic and sorrow expressed by Lou Reed in just a few words. As one of the most influential and enigmatic figures in rock music, Reed's music often delved into dark and gritty themes, exploring the underbelly of urban life and the human experience. From his work with The Velvet Underground to his solo career, Reed created a body of work that is simultaneously awe-inspiring and deeply melancholic. One of the main elements that made Reed's music so magical was his ability to create vivid and evocative imagery through his lyrics. Whether he was singing about drug addiction, love, or the struggles of everyday life, his words transported the listener to a different world. Songs like "Walk on the Wild Side" and "Perfect Day" are timeless classics that continue to resonate with audiences today, showcasing Reed's unparalleled talent for storytelling.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
Affected creatures must make an intelligence saving throw, on a fail they take 1d4 psychic damage and have disadvantage on intelligence checks and saving throws until the end of their next turn. What I m talking about is a risk reward trade-off in difficult social situations such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested.
Songs like "Walk on the Wild Side" and "Perfect Day" are timeless classics that continue to resonate with audiences today, showcasing Reed's unparalleled talent for storytelling. But alongside the magic, there was also a profound sense of sorrow that permeated Reed's work. His songs often touched on themes of loneliness, addiction, and personal demons.
D&D 5E Deceptive Spellcasting
I have noticed people talking a lot about how they allow spellcasters to hide the casting of their spells and even not have their effects noticed even when they have a clear effect.
Most spells should be obvious. They are very powerful abilities, but their downside is that you can't be subtle about it.
The most common form of this is having a character whisper the Verbal components. They require "specific pitch and resonance" and as such should not be able to be whispered.
Somatic components ". include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures." You can't change the gestures of a spell just to make it more subtle.
Material components are again, pretty obvious.
Then there is the matter of people living in a world where spells exist. Most NPCs should be able to recognize a spell being cast. It is an important thing to learn about. Casting spells on other people should also be illegal. It is assault or worse.
log in or register to remove this adwedgeski
Adventurer
Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.
Otherwise, Stealth, Performance, and Sleight of Hand checks are all available for the DM in these circumstances, naturally with some kind of penalty to the effectiveness of the spell on failure, or perhaps whatever happens (Disadvantage on attack rolls, opponent advantage on Saving Throws, etc.).
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.
Otherwise, Stealth, Performance, and Sleight of Hand checks are all available for the DM in these circumstances, naturally with some kind of penalty to the effectiveness of the spell on failure, or perhaps whatever happens (Disadvantage on attack rolls, opponent advantage on Saving Throws, etc.).
And I think allowing that to happen is a huge buff for spellcasters that they don't need. It is also a nerf to Sorcerers. Subtle Spell should be a unique ability that only they get.
wedgeski
Adventurer
And I think allowing that to happen is a huge buff for spellcasters that they don't need. It is also a nerf to Sorcerers. Subtle Spell should be a unique ability that only they get.
Nah. Subtle spell gets the sorcerer out of a jail cell when he's bound and gagged. What I'm talking about is a risk/reward trade-off in difficult social situations (such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested).
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Nah. Subtle spell gets the sorcerer out of a jail cell when he's bound and gagged. What I'm talking about is a risk/reward trade-off in difficult social situations (such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested).
That is reducing Subtle Spell to a very narrow application.
Spellcasting is anything but subtle. You can't whisper. The pitch, resonance, movements, etc. are all exact and specific.
Maybe in the situation you describe it should be the Rogue or Fighter that steps up and uses their skills for the party's benefit.
Magic is brute force. In a social situation you can cast a spell to compell people to do things, but there will be repercussions.
KahlessNestor
Adventurer
And yet it happens in the novels all the time. I'm not too worried about it.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
wedgeski
Adventurer
That is reducing Subtle Spell to a very narrow application.
Spellcasting is anything but subtle. You can't whisper. The pitch, resonance, movements, etc. are all exact and specific.
Maybe in the situation you describe it should be the Rogue or Fighter that steps up and uses their skills for the party's benefit.
Magic is brute force. In a social situation you can cast a spell to compell people to do things, but there will be repercussions.
Eh, honestly I think that strips the game of potential drama for the very small cost of *slightly* reducing the Sorcerer's niche. Your reading of the spellcasting rules is reasonable, but not one by which I'd live or die.
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Eh, honestly I think that strips the game of potential drama for the very small cost of *slightly* reducing the Sorcerer's niche. Your reading of the spellcasting rules is reasonable, but not one by which I'd live or die.
I feel like you haven't read my posts.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
How spellcasting works in this regard is entirely up to the group. The game works fine if one allows subtle spellcasting.
I just require a bluff or slight of hand check, and investigate or arcana to detect the spell in spite of the attempt to hide it.
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
Lots of ways you can play the game. If your group is having fun you're doing it right. If someone else is having fun playing differently, they are doing it right too.
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Lots of ways you can play the game. If your group is having fun you're doing it right. If someone else is having fun playing differently, they are doing it right too.
But we shouldn't discuss anything?
Buffing spellcasting by not having them be noticed by other characters causes all sorts of problems.
I made the thread in response to a variety of posts I have seen lately either stating that certain spells are overpowered or are must haves. It turns out in these cases the problem was ignoring the components of the spell.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
So they were having a bad time but blaming the spell Guidance rather than their mishandling of spellcasting.
Satyrn
First Post
I feel like you haven't read my posts.That may be because you're not expressing yourself clearly, and he's interpreted your posts differently than you intended them to be interpreted.
When I read your OP, for example, it seems like you're telling people they're playing wrong, that what you think is the right way is The Right Way.
But that's probably not what you mean, so you're probably not expressing yourself clearly.
Satyrn
First Post
But we shouldn't discuss anything?
Buffing spellcasting by not having them be noticed by other characters causes all sorts of problems.
I made the thread in response to a variety of posts I have seen lately either stating that certain spells are overpowered or are must haves. It turns out in these cases the problem was ignoring the components of the spell.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
So they were having a bad time but blaming the spell Guidance rather than their mishandling of spellcasting.
Oh, that's better. Now I see that you're talking about helping people fix poor experiences that they've described.
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
But we shouldn't discuss anything?If you're interested in the question "Is it better to allow subtle spell casting or not?" then that's something that can be debated. But your posts do seem to come across as: "If you allow subtle spell casting then you are doing it wrong." If you're just interested in stating your opinion then what is there to debate?
Buffing spellcasting by not having them be noticed by other characters causes all sorts of problems.
I made the thread in response to a variety of posts I have seen lately either stating that certain spells are overpowered or are must haves. It turns out in these cases the problem was ignoring the components of the spell.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
So they were having a bad time but blaming the spell Guidance rather than their mishandling of spellcasting.
Explanation like this is more helpful.
Me, I don't allow subtle spell casting in general because I think you have to say the V component firmly.
jgsugden
Legend
There is a lot of advice from Crawford out there on this topic. There are obvious physical and verbal elements to spellcasting, but you can disguise them, hide them or obscure them if you're smart.
Casting a spell in a loud and bustling marketplace, even when it involves huge gestures and loud speaking, might go unnoticed by the target. If the spell has no obvious signs, the target may never know it was the subject of a spell. That is all well explained in the rules / advice.
If you have a quiet room, the spellcaster is mere feet from the target and the spell has verbal and somatic components . well, you need to be able to mislead the target if you want them to not realize you've cast a spell. Do you have an excuse for the gestures, weird speech and bat guano you're flinging / bell you're chiming / etc. Those things might not be too out of place if they come from someone that looks like a crazy person. or might seem perfectly logical as part of a blessing or ceremony. Can the spellcaster pull off such a ruse? Sounds like a roleplaying challenge to me.
In the end, I think the proper question is not, "What is too powerful?" I think the question to be asked when a PC wants to pull this type of thing off is, "What is the most fun way to proceed?"
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
My view of casting is that the components aren't set in stone. Those listed or described are the "traditional" ones, and many casters will view them as having to be exactly right, while others will use completely different sounds and gestures (Fuego! Rather than Ignis! To set a thing on fire) to cast the same spell.
I also figure it is harder to cast subtly, because you are splitting focus, and the components are there to help focus your will as it is.
Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.
Reed was never afraid to confront the darker aspects of humanity, and his raw and unflinching honesty struck a chord with many listeners. In songs like "Heroin" and "Candy Says", Reed explored the depths of despair and the search for meaning in a sometimes cruel and chaotic world. His music was a reflection of his own experiences and struggles, providing solace and catharsis for those who could relate to his pain. Lou Reed's legacy as both a musician and a poet is undeniable. His unique ability to capture the magic and sorrow of life through his music continues to inspire and move audiences to this day. Though he may be gone, his words and music live on, reminding us of the complex and beautiful nature of the human experience and the power of artistic expression..
Reviews for "The Sorrow of Loss: Lou Reed's Emotional Tribute to His Late Wife in "The Bed"
- John - 2 stars - I found "The magic and sorrow expressed by Lou Reed" to be overly pretentious and self-indulgent. While I understand and appreciate Reed's unique artistic style, this particular album felt disconnected and lacked coherence. The lyrics were often cryptic and hard to decipher, making it difficult for me to connect with the emotions Reed was trying to express. Overall, I wasn't impressed with this album and it left me feeling unsatisfied.
- Sarah - 1 star - As a fan of Lou Reed's earlier works, "The magic and sorrow expressed by Lou Reed" was a major disappointment for me. The experimental nature of the album seemed forced and it lacked the raw energy and emotion that I loved in his previous music. The songs felt repetitive and lacked memorable hooks or melodies. Reed's vocals also seemed uninspired and lackluster. Overall, I found this album to be a lackluster addition to Reed's discography and I would not recommend it to others.
- Mark - 2 stars - While I appreciate Lou Reed's artistic vision and innovation, "The magic and sorrow expressed by Lou Reed" just didn't resonate with me. The album felt disjointed and inconsistent, with songs transitioning abruptly and leaving me confused. The experimental nature of the music overshadowed the emotional depth that Reed is known for, resulting in a lack of connection or impact. I respect the ambition behind this album, but it missed the mark for me personally.