Sage Advice: Jeremy Crawford on Ability Checks & What They're Not

A new Sage Advice column has arrived. In this one, Jeremy Crawford discusses ability checks and spellcasting. Questions include whether attack rolls and saves are basically ability checks (no), whether the hex spell's target has disadvantage on attacks and saves which use the chosen ability (no), whether the bard's Jack of All Trades feature applies to attacks and saves (no), and whether an ability check to grapple or shove is an attack roll (no).

He goes on to answer questions on spellcasting limits, lines of sight, and cantrip scaling.

Find the article here.

​

 

[The Crimson Binome]

So how do you deal with a wizard who moves into a group of opponents and uses Shield as a reaction, then casts Thunderwave as an action to knock everyone back, followed by Misty Step to jump out of the fray? All three are not Cantrips.

From what I recall, Misty Step is the Bonus spell here? In that case, Shield is fine and Thunderwave is fine, but the wizard can't cast Misty Step because doing so would require spending an Action on a non-cantrip spell in the same round as the Bonus spell.

Shield, being a Reaction spell, doesn't fall under this limit.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

This won't work if my 20th level barbarian just took the feat a level or so ago, though.

Eh, it's a limitation on the binary proficiency model, and it's been an issue for as long as a high-level wizard could learn a low-level spell and instantly cast it as well as someone who had learned it in the beginning.

If the problem is only noticeable in situations that are unlikely to occur, then I'd consider that a well-managed concession.

 

[Celtavian]

Really not liking CounterSpelling Counterspells. It allows resources to be burned WAY too fast and gives way to much to the active caster.

Really bad in a world with a lot of casters. Then again I don't like fantasy worlds where casting is overly common. Cheapens it. Casters should be rare, so problems like this are rare.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

Heh. Whereas I like it a great deal. I love the idea of two casters trying to "out-muscle" each other this way. Anything that inspires choices in a magic vs. magic encounter other than "Try to blast harder."

Yeah, but since 9th level mages are generally clocking in at CR 6, they'll have enough spells to burn to force theirs through while each slot used by the players adds up fast even at middle levels.

 

[Mr Fixit]

Heh. Whereas I like it a great deal. I love the idea of two casters trying to "out-muscle" each other this way. Anything that inspires choices in a magic vs. magic encounter other than "Try to blast harder."

Now you reminded me of the crazily great (or was it just crazy?) Baldur's Gate 2 magic countering system. Spell thrust, Breach, Spellstrike and its ilk opposed by stuff like Spell Trap, Spell Shield, etc. Then you count in Magic resistance that has to be lowered separately... I remember having whole freaking charts by my side while playing that game to figure out what counters what. Heh, fond memories!

 

[ehenning]

Now you reminded me of the crazily great (or was it just crazy?) Baldur's Gate 2 magic countering system. Spell thrust, Breach, Spellstrike and its ilk opposed by stuff like Spell Trap, Spell Shield, etc. Then you count in Magic resistance that has to be lowered separately... I remember having whole freaking charts by my side while playing that game to figure out what counters what. Heh, fond memories!

Lol. I have been replaying BG II recently. It is a whole spell/counter-spell game with mages and liches. Very nostalgic!

 

[Mephistopheles]

Interesting. I wouldn't have expected that ruling on Counterspell. I guess the narrative really is more like shooting a bullet out of the air, by using a faster bullet, rather than trying to disrupt someone as the spell is being formed.

I'm not so sure. The spell description states that you "attempt to interrupt a creature in the process of casting a spell". So, for example, while a Shield spell would be cast as a reaction to seeing the incoming Magic Missile bolt(s), a Counterspell would be cast before the spell has launched. With that in mind, how does a caster decide to cast Counterspell?

From what I can find in the PHB/DMG, there's no mention of any means to identify the spell someone is casting (as would be done with Spellcraft in 3E). If that's correct, then you're firing blind if you choose to cast Counterspell. Depending on the situation, you don't know if it will be an automatic counter or if you'll need to make the ability check. Even so, if a counterspeller just uses the third level Counterspell they will have above average chances to dispel anything up to fifth level spells (assuming +5 spellcasting ability modifier), perhaps with improving odds the higher level the caster (as the means to raise the spellcasting ability above 20 become available).

This also makes the multiple counterspell game interesting because if slots above third level are in play you don't know the level of the spell slot they used to cast Counterspell. If we say that when someone begins casting in reaction to you beginning casting the odds are decent that they are counterspelling you, then if you are considering counterspelling the potential counterspell you need to decide what level of spell slot to use if you don't want to risk the ability check.

Speaking of ability checks, Hex may have some utility in the counterspell game to impose disadvantage on a caster for potential Counterspell ability checks. This is assuming you can guess the type of caster you're dealing with and that the counterspell game is worth engaging in - I haven't played enough 5E yet to say, but it seems like it may be more attractive now that it is a reaction rather than a ready action as it was in 3E. Could make warlocks or sorcerer/warlocks decent at hampering enemy casters.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

From what I can find in the PHB/DMG, there's no mention of any means to identify the spell someone is casting (as would be done with Spellcraft in 3E). If that's correct, then you're firing blind if you choose to cast Counterspell.

When I see that there's no way to mechanic for identifying a spell, it seems more reasonable to me that identification is automatic. For example, the verbal component of a spell might clearly name the spell to any who can hear.

The alternative supposition - that it's impossible to tell what a spell is, while it is being cast - seems unreasonable to me. For a game that is marketed to new players, I don't think they would create such a deep level of meta-game.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

I'm not so sure. The spell description states that you "attempt to interrupt a creature in the process of casting a spell". So, for example, while a Shield spell would be cast as a reaction to seeing the incoming Magic Missile bolt(s), a Counterspell would be cast before the spell has launched. With that in mind, how does a caster decide to cast Counterspell?

From what I can find in the PHB/DMG, there's no mention of any means to identify the spell someone is casting (as would be done with Spellcraft in 3E). If that's correct, then you're firing blind if you choose to cast Counterspell.

That's they way I'm going to run it, you want to stop them from casting a spell, do it or don't. IMHO a reaction is far too little time to piece together what set of hand gestures, words of power and potential materials from over all the potential ways people learn spells.

 

[Celtavian]

That's they way I'm going to run it, you want to stop them from casting a spell, do it or don't. IMHO a reaction is far too little time to piece together what set of hand gestures, words of power and potential materials from over all the potential ways people learn spells.

And you can cast invisibly. I do believe counterspell requires they see the caster to use it.