D&D 5E (2014) Counterspell nerfed!

[Maxperson]

Are you saying that any kobold is much more competent than any real world individual ?

Are you arguing that the rules make exceptions for Kobolds?

 

[Lyxen]

No there isn't. You twisted argument to be an absolute when it wasn't. That makes your response a Strawman. Don't do that.

And again, compare your initial stance "It sees you unless something special happens to keep it from being seen" and what I said which does not require something special to happen: "Again, if I try to approach someone from 100 feet away, in darkness while he is engaged in combat, will you pretend that the rules say that he will ALWAYS see me ?" Because nothing special happens, it's just a situation that happens reasonably often in combat.

So don't accuse me of strawmanning either. You have a very extreme attitude on this topic which again is not invalid if that's the way you want to play the game, but please don't try to imply that other people are wrong according to the RAW by not accepting that all creatures in D&D have an unfailing sense of everything that happens on the battlefield better than any real world individual or "better than military special forces and olympic athletes". This is not strawmanning, these are your exact words, and I don't think that many DMs would accept these premises as a basis for their games if they want some verisimilitude.

LOL There you go declaring people who disagree with you about how the rules are written, "gamist" or "powergaming" again. Sorry man, but if I'm "gamist" for arguing what the rules say, then so you are you.

No, the problem is that you are inventing things that are not in the rules to try and force a gamist attitude (which, by the way, I've never said anything bad about) on the game when I'm just pointing out that the game, in itself, out of the box and perfectly RAW supports completely different ways of playing and that these are not worse for being different from your specific perspective.

The game never says that you notice anyone casting a spell, just as he never says that you notice someone talking in the middle of combat, despite the volume of noise generated being the same, or not. The game never says that you notice someone doing a gesture with hand during the combat whether it's casting a spell or scratching his bottom. It's all in the descriptions of the DM, who has the absolute right to say that a given character notices something or not based on the circumstances.

The gamist attitude that you propose is a valid way to play, but not more valid than the opposite attitude that fully empowers the DM to tell exactly what he thinks a character sees based on the circumstances, that's all.

 

[Lyxen]

Are you arguing that the rules make exceptions for Kobolds?

No, I'm arguing that your views that "PCs that are better than military special forces and olympic athletes" is not only unsupported by the rules, but that even if that was the case, the rules of perceptions are not PC specific, so why would all other creatures possess senses so extraordinary that they would always detecte anyone casting a spell in combat whatever the circumstances, for example kobolds. Or are also all kobolds "better than military special forces and olympic athletes" ?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yep. That's obviously not true for 5e D&D, though. People in D&D are objectively different, given, "In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you." D&D combatants are much more competent than any real world individual. This is further backed up by the surprise rules which say that you automatically notice anyone not being stealthy, which is also clearly not true in the real world.

You're extrapolating past that, though.

 

[Mort]

On a different note: fiery explosion from kelek is obviously a subtle spell fireball. So you just can't perceive the casting as the bat guano used is hidden in his component pouch. Or he uses his staff of power to cast the fiery explosion.

Since it's a 10d6 fireball - and that's what the staff of power casts, that seems like the likeliest option (as opposed to an upcast to 5th level one). But it's not stated - just as easy to state "Kelek casts fireball from his staff of power..."

BUT - it's not called fireball, it's called fiery explosions (not the name of any spell and it's not identified as a spell plus unlike spells it has a recharge mechanic).

AND it's in a separate place from Kelek's spells - which are listed lower in the statblock.

By the wording of counterspell (it counters spells and spells only) it really shouldn't work, neither should the (Ancients) Paladin aura, nor globe of invulnerability etc. etc.

And THAT'S the real issue (IMO all the stuff about being able to see the casting etc. is a distraction because that's not the problem being caused by this statblock change) - this is classified as an ability not a spell. It completely confuses the issue.

Sure the DM can say "it's a spell, I'll treat it like one" but that entirely defeats the purpose of this being EASIER for the DM. I hope they have a bit more care with changes in the future!

 

[Maxperson]

And again, compare your initial stance "It sees you unless something special happens to keep it from being seen" and what I said which does not require something special to happen: "Again, if I try to approach someone from 100 feet away, in darkness while he is engaged in combat, will you pretend that the rules say that he will ALWAYS see me ?" Because nothing special happens, it's just a situation that happens reasonably often in combat.

Dude. That's a blatant Strawman. My stance which involves, "unless something special"(such as darkness), is not absolute. Your twisting of my argument involves "always" which is pretty darn blatant man.

So again. STOP Strawmanning me. If you don't want me to accuse you of it, stop doing it. I'm not even going to bother to read the rest of your response as long as you're pretending you aren't twisting my argument.

 

[Bill Zebub]

You cannot possibly have ever been in a melee fight if you think it’s a matter of incompetence to not notice things that aren’t immediately in your face when you are engaged in melee combat with someone.

All we have to do is look at how phones affect driver awareness. Unless, that is, being attacked by a slavering monster is somehow less distracting than a social media feed.

 

[Zaukrie]

As stated.....it is counterspell, mage killer feat (? right name?).....any magic items that grants spell/magic resistance / turning....anything that is about spells is nerfed. Not a fan. Any natural ability, skill, anything about spells is changed.

The can format it differently and get the same (excellent) change.

 

[Guest 7030100]

All we have to do is look at how phones affect driver awareness. Unless, that is, being attacked by a slavering monster is somehow less distracting than a social media feed.

Wait.... Are you suggesting that "slavering monster" and "social media feed" are different beasts?? Heck, I thought that's why it's called a "feed," the way social media feasts upon the brains of unwary users.

 

[Lyxen]

Dude. That's a blatant Strawman. My stance which involves, "unless something special"(such as darkness), is not absolute. Your twisting of my argument involves "always" which is pretty darn blatant man.

No, I have given you the exact quote that you have used "It sees you unless something special happens to keep it from being seen". You are the one requiring something special from happening, which is all I'm pointing out as my example does not involve a special something happening, just circumstances which are fairly common on a D&D battlefield.