D&D 5E Counterspell nerfed!

[Lyxen]

That's the big one

I'm sorry, but it's not really big. All it says is that "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. ". And it's not even in the main text, it's in a side box, and uses words like "most" and "usually" (or even "around", what does it mean, within 5 feet ? 10 feet ? 20 feet ? Certainly not 50 feet even less 100 feet), so these are neither rules nor a certainty.

Another is from surprise where if you aren't trying to be stealthy, you are noticed.

No, this is not what is said. It is said that if you are not trying to be stealthy, you will probably not achieve surprise on your opponent. Don't read too much into this."It does not mean that you will notice them, and it certainly does not mean that you will even see them or hear them. RAW, there is no proof of this.

You are generally aware of what goes on around you in combat. That would include a wizard chanting, waving his fingers and thumbing bat poo.

No, once more, this is your personal inference and it is certainly not in the rules, and if it is prove it. I am pretty sure that you will fail.

You would probably notice him if he was right in front of you, but what if he was 20 feet away ? 50 feet away ? 100 feet away ? Behind an orc swinging his axe and thirsting for your blood ? Behind a couple of orcs ? Behind 20 orcs ? Behind 100 orcs ? And what about lighting ? What if the light was poor ? Or if he was in a completely obscure area but still seeing you standing in the light ? And what about ambiant noise ? What guarantee do you have that you can even hear the chanting ? What if the orcs above are screaming war cries at you ? Would you still hear the wizard ? And by the way how loud is the chanting ? Nothing is said here, but I can certainly chant with nothing more than a humming noise since the words are not the source of the spell's power. Same with the somatc gestures, how discrete can they be, since you need only one hand free ?

There are no rules there, only purely the DM's (local) ruling and certainly no right to any entitlement of a player to noticing spell casting. None.

By the way, I'm not saying that you are wrong playing it that way, just pointing out that this is YOUR. LOCAL. RULING. Not the RAW. And that someone, like me, who still gives a lot of value to the Subtle Spell Metamagic power (my halfling sorceress took this one as her first choice), but who rules that you will not perceive a wizard casting 20 feet away from behind orcs charging at you is equally right if you look at the RAW.

Subtle spell is critical for social situations which are usually in a quiet environment, but in the middle of combat, you will find zero proof in the RAW that it is noticeable.

Without the caster being stealthy in some way(subtle spell, invisibility, etc.), you're going to notice a caster.

Do you have proof of this RAW ? I'm certain that you don't.

If you read the components section on page 203 of the PHB, they are pretty darn noticeable.

On the contrary, as demonstrated above, nothing says the chanting has to be specifically loud, and the gestures need only one hand.

I have been in hundreds of LARP skirmishes with between a couple to hundreds of combattants, and I can absolutely guarantee that, even in LARPs where there is no actual magic (sad, but it's a sad real world that we live in ), and where people applying magic effects depends on the magic user being seen and heard by his target (therefore there is direct pointing of the finger at the target(s), components being used visually and loud shouting to attract attention), even seasoned fighters whose good faith cannot be doubted will miss spellcasting affecting them from 20 feet away because combat is so loud and chaotic and fast and brutal. And again, this is with the spellcaster WANTING to be seen !

Once more, your interpretation is right at your table, but please stop trying to convince us that the rules are written that way, it's simply not true, which is a good thing because it makes other more mysterious and equally interesting interpretations just as valid.

Obviously if there's dim light(moonlight), etc., that would possibly obscure thing. But again if you read the components section, spells being cast are really obvious.

Again no, they are not, demonstrated above.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm sorry, but it's not really big. All it says is that "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. ". And it's not even in the main text, it's in a side box, and uses words like "most" and "usually" (or even "around", what does it mean, within 5 feet ? 10 feet ? 20 feet ? Certainly not 50 feet even less 100 feet), so these are neither rules nor a certainty.

Usually, as in "It sees you unless something special happens to keep it from being seen."

No, this is not what is said. It is said that if you are not trying to be stealthy, you will probably not achieve surprise on your opponent.

There is no "probably" if you are not trying to be stealthy. It's absolute. If you are not being stealthy, you will not achieve surprise.

"If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side."

As you can see, it's automatic if nobody is being stealth and possible if one or both sides are being stealthy.

No, once more, this is your personal inference and it is certainly not in the rules, and if it is prove it. I am pretty sure that you will fail.

Right, because strong movements, chanting, not whispering, chanting and waving around components that they pulled out of a pouch aren't going to be noticed by people on high alert. You do you, but I'm not going to assume incompetence on the part of the PCs.

You would probably notice him if he was right in front of you, but what if he was 20 feet away ? 50 feet away ? 100 feet away ? Behind an orc swinging his axe and thirsting for your blood ? Behind a couple of orcs ? Behind 20 orcs ? Behind 100 orcs ? And what about lighting ? What if the light was poor ? Or if he was in a completely obscure area but still seeing you standing in the light ? And what about ambiant noise ? What guarantee do you have that you can even hear the chanting ? What if the orcs above are screaming war cries at you ? Would you still hear the wizard ? And by the way how loud is the chanting ? Nothing is said here, but I can certainly chant with nothing more than a humming noise since the words are not the source of the spell's power. Same with the somatc gestures, how discrete can they be, since you need only one hand free ?

I already went over this the last time you brought it up. Repeating it won't do anything. I do keep wondering, though, why you are bringing up 100 feet away. Counterspell has a range of 60 feet. None of the rest is any different than someone who is hiding and comes out of hiding before attacking.

Subtle spell is critical for social situations which are usually in a quiet environment, but in the middle of combat, you will find zero proof in the RAW that it is noticeable.

Uh uh. You don't get to accuse me of making stuff up and then make stuff up. There's nothing in RAW that says it's for quiet environments. opposing side

On the contrary, as demonstrated above, nothing says the chanting has to be specifically loud, and the gestures need only one hand.

Other than it uses the word chanting. Chanting is not quiet.

I have been in hundreds of LARP skirmishes with between a couple to hundreds of combattants, and I can absolutely guarantee that, even in LARPs where there is no actual magic (sad, but it's a sad real world that we live in ), and where people applying magic effects depends on the magic user being seen and heard by his target (therefore there is direct pointing of the finger at the target(s), components being used visually and loud shouting to attract attention), even seasoned fighters whose good faith cannot be doubted will miss spellcasting affecting them from 20 feet away because combat is so loud and chaotic and fast and brutal. And again, this is with the spellcaster WANTING to be seen !

Because LARPs and LARPers are good representatives of a realistic combat involving PCs that are better than military special forces and olympic athletes.

 

[Lyxen]

Usually, as in "It sees you unless something special happens to keep it from being seen."

No, it means "usually", so in the sense that, in clear light, at reasonable distance, etc. Hopefully you will not claim that it means "always, in all circumstances". It might be distance, it might be distraction, but RAW, you have no support to say that he will ALWAYS been noticed whatever circumstances might be present. 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 ?

There is no "probably" if you are not trying to be stealthy. It's absolute. If you are not being stealthy, you will not achieve surprise.

Again, you are wrong in this. Read the rules, "The DM determines who might be surprised". After that, it's about stealth checks where a DM can always use passives or even auto success and failures even without rules, just because of the conditions. So no, RAW, surprise might be achieved for inherent stealthiness or quietness.

"If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side."

As you can see, it's automatic if nobody is being stealth and possible if one or both sides are being stealthy.

And if one side is trying to be stealthy, they still might be surprised by the other one, again see how checks are done.

Right, because strong movements, chanting, not whispering, chanting and waving around components that they pulled out of a pouch aren't going to be noticed by people on high alert. You do you, but I'm not going to assume incompetence on the part of the PCs.

You can assume whatever you want IN YOUR OWN GAMES, but please don't pretend it's RAW. Otherwise, prove it.

I already went over this the last time you brought it up. Repeating it won't do anything. I do keep wondering, though, why you are bringing up 100 feet away. Counterspell has a range of 60 feet. None of the rest is any different than someone who is hiding and comes out of hiding before attacking.

OK, then explain to me, where, in the RAW, it says that you ALWAYS notice someone casting a spell within 60 feet whatever the circumstances. I'll be waiting a long time.

Uh uh. You don't get to accuse me of making stuff up and then make stuff up. There's nothing in RAW that says it's for quiet environments. opposing side

No, you are inventing rules about noticing things that appear absolutely nowhere within the RAW, I'm just pointing out that, in quiet environments, it's perfectly the DM's right to tell some things are noticed because it's quiet and say that it's not in less quiet environments.

The DM's rulings, not the RAW which say absolutely nothing of the things that you assume are in there and need to enforce your position.

Other than it uses the word chanting. Chanting is not quiet.

Again, explain to us where in the RAW it says that chanting has to be loud. Or that it will be noticed whatever the distance and whatever the conditions by anyone. It simply does not, otherwise, once more, prove it.

Because LARPs and LARPers are good representatives of a realistic combat involving PCs that are better than military special forces and olympic athletes.

It's much better as an experience than you trying to pretend that what you are saying is supported by rules that don't exist.

And yes, of course, level 1 adventures are all "better than military special forces and olympic athletes". Not to mention all monsters and adversaries, to which these rules apply to, from kobolds to goblins. Sorry, again, you have zero justification for this, whether in the RAW or in real life.

 

[Maxperson]

No, it means "usually", so in the sense that, in clear light, at reasonable distance, etc. Hopefully you will not claim that it means "always, in all circumstances".

You just quoted me as saying that is wasn't always in all circumstances. LOL

It might be distance, it might be distraction, but RAW, you have no support to say that he will ALWAYS been noticed whatever circumstances might be present. 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 ?

Only if you will pretend that what you just did isn't a Strawman

Again, you are wrong in this. Read the rules, "The DM determines who might be surprised". After that, it's about stealth checks where a DM can always use passives or even auto success and failures even without rules, just because of the conditions. So no, RAW, surprise might be achieved for inherent stealthiness or quietness.

He determines "who might be surprised" via the rules(unless he house rules a change) which say that if you are not being stealthy, you are noticed automatically and there is no surprise. And he further determines that via the rules which say that if you are stealthy, there is a chance to surprise the other side. Good God man, You're ignoring the R(ules) and W(written) portions of RAW to come up with that. I don't think the "as" portion in the middle helps you much, either.

OK, then explain to me, where, in the RAW, it says that you ALWAYS notice someone casting a spell within 60 feet whatever the circumstances. I'll be waiting a long time.

Yeeeaaaaahhh, I'm not going to try and prove your Strawman of my argument.

Again, explain to us where in the RAW it says that chanting has to be loud. Or that it will be noticed whatever the distance and whatever the conditions by anyone. It simply does not, otherwise, once more, prove it.

Again with the Strawarmy. I never said it has to be loud. Chanting just isn't Q-U-I-E-T.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You do you, but I'm not going to assume incompetence on the part of the PCs.

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.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

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.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don't especially like counterspell as it is, but I also do agree that it is not that easy to always see an enemy casting a spell if you have no clear line of sight. But many spells require line of sight so, it should work both ways.
A fireball is ground targeted, so probaly countering that is harder than a suggestion spell, where the caster has to interact with the target.

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.

 

[Lyxen]

You just quoted me as saying that is wasn't always in all circumstances. LOL

No, sorry, there is a difference between what you are saying above and pretending like you did before that something special needs to happen to prevent the noticing.

Only if you will pretend that what you just did isn't a Strawman

Actually, it certainly was not one. Just being a bit far is not "something special that needs to happen".

He determines "who might be surprised" via the rules(unless he house rules a change) which say that if you are not being stealthy, you are noticed automatically and there is no surprise. And he further determines that via the rules which say that if you are stealthy, there is a chance to surprise the other side.

And again, noticing the other side does not mean seeing him, or hearing him, and certainly not noticing spellcasting on his part. You are inferring way too much from two simple sentences of the rules on completely different topics, as well as forgetting that creatures might be naturally stealthy without specifically trying to be. The RAW is fuzzy on purpose, and your specifically gamist interpretations that attempt to normalise situations are not supported by the text, that's all. It does not make them invalid for your table, but other interpretations are just as vaild.

Good God man, You're ignoring the R(ules) and W(written) portions of RAW to come up with that. I don't think the "as" portion in the middle helps you much, either.

No, the problem is that you are completely inventing your view of what the RAW should have been. But, fortunately, this discussion shows that you don't have anything to stand on.

Yeeeaaaaahhh, I'm not going to try and prove your Strawman of my argument.

Again with the Strawarmy. I never said it has to be loud. Chanting just isn't Q-U-I-E-T.

Who said it was ? The only thing I'm saying is that you are trying to say that the rules say that anything not quiet will always been noted by everyone in combat. The rules say NOTHING of the kind, and I'm not the only one here telling you that your very gamist way of thinking is not the only way to play which is 100% in line with the rules.

 

[Lyxen]

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.

Again, where is the proof of that ? Are you saying that any kobold is much more competent than any real world individual ? Not only is this supported by nothing either in the rules or their intent, but it's a very very biased view of fighting.

But anyway, you have already shown the limits of your position by refusing to explain how the rules prove that everything that happens in combat is noticed by everyone whatever the conditions, distance, lighting, ambient sound, cover, etc.

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.

And again, your reading of the stealth rules and the skills use is extremely biased and supported by nothing in the rules except your own conviction. I suggest reading a number of sections in the DMG in particular about checks, passives, the role of dice, etc.

 

[Maxperson]

No, sorry, there is a difference between what you are saying above and pretending like you did before that something special needs to happen to prevent the noticing.

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.

I'm not the only one here telling you that your very gamist way of thinking is not the only way to play which is 100% in line with the rules.

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.