D&D 5E The Gloves Are Off?

[Bill Zebub]

See, I feel that if the game structure is standing in the way of the fiction, its the game structure that needs to change.

How in this case is it ‘standing in the way of the fiction’? What fiction is being prevented from happening?

 

[Micah Sweet]

It must follow, then, that AD&D-style spell interruption is not a part of 5e D&D. Which it's not. QED.

Maybe not, but to me it really makes a lot more if it did.

 

[Micah Sweet]

How in this case is it ‘standing in the way of the fiction’? What fiction is being prevented from happening?

I was responding to what I saw as a general playstyle statement.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

How often in your game does a warrior put a swing into a foe, that an adjacent warrior just finished off, because they'd already committed to attacking that foe?

Rarely if ever, I'd bet - if warrior A finishes off Orc #6 on init 15 then warrior B is sure as shootin' gonna turn her attention to Orc #4 just behind it.

But if those two warriors could both somehow be on init 15 they'd probably both attack Orc #6, perhaps leading to overkilling it but leaving Orc #4 unopposed for the moment. I see this all the time - multiple attackers swinging simultaneously at the same target and all hitting, with each one doing more than enough damage on its own to kill it.

Strictly non-simultaneous turn-based resolution allows far more precise tactical choices than would ever be possible in reality.

Why should the second counterspell always be faster than the first, though?

Maybe the amount of mana/weave/arcane/divine/psionics that is necessary to counter a normal spell is always a fraction of the amount needed to counter a counter spell. Maybe spells that require less magical energy are ever so slightly faster to cast.

So if a fireball uses 100 arcane energy, a counter to it might be 10% less and be a 90. But a counter to the counter would be 81 and so forth reaching infinitesimally small amounts of magic energy once you get into 100s of branching counters all tied to a single spell.

You may not like my system just proposed, but it's not like it took more than 3 minutes to come up with a pseudo scientific reasoning that fits within other established DnD narratives.

 

[Maxperson]

Maybe the amount of mana/weave/arcane/divine/psionics that is necessary to counter a normal spell is always a fraction of the amount needed to counter a counter spell. Maybe spells that require less magical energy are ever so slightly faster to cast.

That wouldn't matter, though. From reaction to casting of the counter, a literal instant has passed. It's not possible to recognize that a counter is being cast and respond to it with one of your own. By the time the thought hits you that you need to cast that counterspell, the original counterspell would be done. It's a break in the fiction caused by the mechanics that it doesn't work that way.

You may not like my system just proposed, but it's not like it took more than 3 minutes to come up with a pseudo scientific reasoning that fits within other established DnD narratives.

It doesn't really fit the narrative, though. Even if the second counter is faster to cast, the original would be done in the fiction before you even start.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

That wouldn't matter, though. From reaction to casting of the counter, a literal instant has passed. It's not possible to recognize that a counter is being cast and respond to it with one of your own. By the time the thought hits you that you need to cast that counterspell, the original counterspell would be done. It's a break in the fiction caused by the mechanics that it doesn't work that way.

It doesn't really fit the narrative, though. Even if the second counter is faster to cast, the original would be done in the fiction before you even start.

Reaction is a game rule representing things that can be done by a character outside their turn in initiative. It's not an indication of the amount of time it takes to resolve an action.

If a round takes 6 seconds and there are 100 characters 8n combat each character is not taking a .06 second slice of time to perform their actions.

Everything a character does from the start of their turn in combat until the start of their next turn in combat just has to fit in a 6 second window to match the narrative expectations of the game. Nothing has to instantaneous.

 

[Lanefan]

I have no idea how this relates to what I wrote that you are responding to.

You said that imaginin g things happening sequentially would cause you to dislike retcons, or something similar; my reply was an attempt to point out that if things can happen non-sequentially in the fiction (i.e. time flows more than one way and retcons are a thing) there's bigger problems.

 

[tetrasodium]

And I don't understand why that bothers them, since the play loop is for the players, not the characters.

Even though each character's movement happens on their own turn (play loop), I don't imagine it happening that way in the fiction.

I suppose if I did imagine movement happening sequentially then the reaction rules would really bother me. But I don't, and they don't.

Why ignore that two of the three steps in the play loop are the gm's responsibility? The reaction interrupt abilities fire in the middle of those two.

 

[Lanefan]

Maybe the amount of mana/weave/arcane/divine/psionics that is necessary to counter a normal spell is always a fraction of the amount needed to counter a counter spell. Maybe spells that require less magical energy are ever so slightly faster to cast.

So if a fireball uses 100 arcane energy, a counter to it might be 10% less and be a 90. But a counter to the counter would be 81 and so forth reaching infinitesimally small amounts of magic energy once you get into 100s of branching counters all tied to a single spell.

You may not like my system just proposed, but it's not like it took more than 3 minutes to come up with a pseudo scientific reasoning that fits within other established DnD narratives.

Hey, at least it's a consistent logic that could be applied to these things, and for that I commend you.

The only thing that doesn't follow the logic is that a counterspell against any spell other than a fireball always takes 90 units but a counter against another counter (or, I suppose, a Shield or any other reaction spell) takes fewer.

And with this we have the roots of a spell-point-like system where a caster gets x-number of energy units per day to spend in whatever manner happens to suit.

 

[Knorrrssk]

I would generally assume gloves as default when adventuring. When you are fighting with bladed weapons - even if you have absolutely no other protection - the absolute bare minimum you want to get away with is gloves or gauntlets of some kind, even if they are just leather or some other tough material.
For starters, without them you risk wet or bloody fingers slipping from hafts or hilts. But just as importantly you need to be able to grip or ward your opponent's weapons without risking slicing your hand open.
Now, a character might need to take those off to do certain things like picking a lock or what have you. But not to just open a chest.