Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Arkhandus" data-source="post: 3486773" data-attributes="member: 13966">Spellweaver is in Monster Manual II.&nbsp; And it's Spellweaving ability is a racial trait, which is why it can cast multiple spells simultaneously.Since the rules aren't clear on the counterspell question, considering that Reactive Counterspell and such aren't core so they weren't considered in the core rules, it's purely a matter of DM choice and whatever common sense he or she chooses to use in the decision.The only precedent in the rules for the 'interruption' argument is for spells with a long casting time, and it's iffy how it may pertain to this non-core feat I'm unfamiliar with.&nbsp; Probably irrelevant to it, but since it's a non-core feat and thus got precious little consideration before they shoved it out to print (as WotC always does, sadly), there's no other core rules precedence for my argument or any other against this wierd counterspelling thing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Arkhandus, post: 3486773, member: 13966"] Spellweaver is in Monster Manual II. And it's Spellweaving ability is a racial trait, which is why it can cast multiple spells simultaneously. Since the rules aren't clear on the counterspell question, considering that Reactive Counterspell and such aren't core so they weren't considered in the core rules, it's purely a matter of DM choice and whatever common sense he or she chooses to use in the decision. The only precedent in the rules for the 'interruption' argument is for spells with a long casting time, and it's iffy how it may pertain to this non-core feat I'm unfamiliar with. Probably irrelevant to it, but since it's a non-core feat and thus got precious little consideration before they shoved it out to print (as WotC always does, sadly), there's no other core rules precedence for my argument or any other against this wierd counterspelling thing. [/QUOTE]

Verification