Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Xanathar's and Counterspell
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Warmaster Horus" data-source="post: 7271349" data-attributes="member: 6785438"><p>There is a suggested method for identifying a spell being cast in XGtE that requires you to use a reaction (or a following action) to roll an Intelligence(Arcana) check to determine what is being cast.</p><p></p><p>This really messes up Counterspell in common play. Since both determining the spell and casting Counterspell require the same reaction to the original spell being cast it gets pretty messy. I've had some DMs who just say, "This NPC is casting a spell", to which you then have to decide with no other info about whether your spellcaster will react with Counterspell. Interestingly enough those same DMs seem to cast Counterspell from the NPC's end after I had announced what I was casting.</p><p></p><p>While there are some who will say this 'realistic', I differ in that opinion. I'd rather have dramatic. For example, look at the capstone event of Critical Role's final battle vs Vecna and you'll see why it would be drastically different and not nearly as satisfying if the 'reaction to identify' rule had been in place.</p><p></p><p>So in my mind, here's how it will go.</p><p><strong>Case 1</strong></p><p>DM: The NPC casts a spell.</p><p>Wizard: I use my reaction to determine what the spell is! [Rolls an Arcana check]</p><p>DM: You succeed. It's a Disintegrate aimed at you! Make a Dex save.</p><p></p><p><strong>Case 2</strong></p><p>DM: The NPC casts a spell.</p><p>Wizard: I cast a spell as a Reaction. [note, the player shouldn't have to reveal their spell until the DM decides if they're going to Counterspell]</p><p>DM: The NPC casts a spell as a Reaction. [because why not cast Counterspell against a spell being cast as a reaction to his]</p><p>Sorcerer: I cast a spell as a Reaction.</p><p>DM: Another NPC casts a spell as a Reaction. [and so on...]</p><p></p><p>Do you see the disadvantage that the first Counterspell caster has? That's right, they don't know what spell they're countering while everyone else knows that ensuing spells will be Counterspells. This is dumb.</p><p></p><p>My fix would be to force a character to use their reaction to identify a spell being cast using Intelligence(Arcana) using standard parameters per the suggested rule. AND, if they want to, use that same reaction to cast a reaction spell. They're still burning the reaction whether they cast Counterspell or not for that particular action and it requires some acumen (Arcana check) to identify the spell.</p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Case 3</strong> (my fix)</p><p>DM: The NPC casts a spell.</p><p>Wizard: I use my Reaction to determine what spell is being cast. [Rolls an Arcana Check and based on that decision decides whether to cast Counterspell]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Warmaster Horus, post: 7271349, member: 6785438"] There is a suggested method for identifying a spell being cast in XGtE that requires you to use a reaction (or a following action) to roll an Intelligence(Arcana) check to determine what is being cast. This really messes up Counterspell in common play. Since both determining the spell and casting Counterspell require the same reaction to the original spell being cast it gets pretty messy. I've had some DMs who just say, "This NPC is casting a spell", to which you then have to decide with no other info about whether your spellcaster will react with Counterspell. Interestingly enough those same DMs seem to cast Counterspell from the NPC's end after I had announced what I was casting. While there are some who will say this 'realistic', I differ in that opinion. I'd rather have dramatic. For example, look at the capstone event of Critical Role's final battle vs Vecna and you'll see why it would be drastically different and not nearly as satisfying if the 'reaction to identify' rule had been in place. So in my mind, here's how it will go. [B]Case 1[/B] DM: The NPC casts a spell. Wizard: I use my reaction to determine what the spell is! [Rolls an Arcana check] DM: You succeed. It's a Disintegrate aimed at you! Make a Dex save. [B]Case 2[/B] DM: The NPC casts a spell. Wizard: I cast a spell as a Reaction. [note, the player shouldn't have to reveal their spell until the DM decides if they're going to Counterspell] DM: The NPC casts a spell as a Reaction. [because why not cast Counterspell against a spell being cast as a reaction to his] Sorcerer: I cast a spell as a Reaction. DM: Another NPC casts a spell as a Reaction. [and so on...] Do you see the disadvantage that the first Counterspell caster has? That's right, they don't know what spell they're countering while everyone else knows that ensuing spells will be Counterspells. This is dumb. My fix would be to force a character to use their reaction to identify a spell being cast using Intelligence(Arcana) using standard parameters per the suggested rule. AND, if they want to, use that same reaction to cast a reaction spell. They're still burning the reaction whether they cast Counterspell or not for that particular action and it requires some acumen (Arcana check) to identify the spell. [B] Case 3[/B] (my fix) DM: The NPC casts a spell. Wizard: I use my Reaction to determine what spell is being cast. [Rolls an Arcana Check and based on that decision decides whether to cast Counterspell] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Xanathar's and Counterspell
Top