No, they don't have to, but some people like them to be at least comparable, for a variety of reasons. That's just as valid a preference.Npcs and PCs don’t need to use the Same rules.
No, they don't have to, but some people like them to be at least comparable, for a variety of reasons. That's just as valid a preference.Npcs and PCs don’t need to use the Same rules.
No, but if they don't that explanation is meaningless.Npcs and PCs don’t need to use the Same rules.
Again, they changed the rules mid-edition.Back in 3x, you could counter spells but not spell-like abilities or supernatural abilities. This is literally the same thing, but without the (Sp) and (Su) tags.
How so?No, but if they don't that explanation is meaningless.
This is correct, but D&D is going by the not using the same rules, which is easier to run and more versatile as Monsters can do anything the DM wants.No, they don't have to, but some people like them to be at least comparable, for a variety of reasons. That's just as valid a preference.
This sounds like a "gotcha" question to me, but yes, i have. I use material from many sources, and adapt them to my game and my table.Actually a question Micah, have you used any supplements or extra player material like Xanathar’s or Tasha’s since you started playing 5e? Or any of the new monster books like Volo’s or Mordenkainen’s?
And others find it easier to build and reverse-engineer monsters and NPCs when they can be more easily compared to PC standards. Again, these approaches cater to different preferences.This is correct, but D&D is going by the not using the same rules, which is easier to run and more versatile as Monsters can do anything the DM wants.
Not a gotcha question. I just would have felt your game sounded boring to me if you did not allow extra material. I am glad you do.This sounds like a "gotcha" question to me, but yes, i have. I use material from many sources, and adapt them to my game and my table.
Spells are magic, but not all magic is spells. Being able to counter spell something is dependent, in my fiction, on understanding what I am counterspelling. I understand spells, because I am a spellcaster, but I don’t have a grasp of all magicHow does it make sense to you then? And ignoring it is not the same thing.
Yeah I agree though I am partially to blame.I'm reading this thread to find out about the new monsters, not for a 3 page discussion of how their spellcasting change requires the DM to use good judgement in order to interact with Counterspell. Can that be moved to another thread please?
Well, it's not really a preference issue when the system never promised that. Process simulation is not something that has been a priority for most D&D, and it has been gone for a long time.No, they don't have to, but some people like them to be at least comparable, for a variety of reasons. That's just as valid a preference.
OK. But how likely is it to actually affect your game? It your players are the type to say "hey, how come we used to be able to counter this thing the bad guy did?" then just change them back into spells, or assign an appropriate DC based on what you think the spell's level would be. Or just handwave it away and say "starting from now, this is how it's always been."Again, they changed the rules mid-edition.
Is that evident in the fiction, such as the PCs being from a different species from NPCs, or is it purely a rule mechanic that is not acknowledged in world?Npcs and PCs don’t need to use the Same rules.
No they didn't. As someone pointed out to me in another thread, these non-spell spell attacks have been around sound launch. The Lich is an example.Again, they changed the rules mid-edition.
I mean that is just built into this edition (Brute you deal double the dice of damage on a melee hit) and I would say "That knight was trained to use the armor and sword better than you are... maybe next time make friends with and learn from the knight instead of killing it and taking it's stuff"For example, let's say the PCs fight an NPC warrior in full plate and using a greatsword. When the knight hits, he does 4d6 damage and he has a 23 AC. The PCs vanquish the knight, and when the fighter puts on the plate and grabs the sword is confused to find the armor is mundane plate (AC 18) and a mundane greatsword (2d6 damage). I think it's fair he asks why the knight was hitting harder and harder to hit and the answer be more then "well, a creature at CR x must have suchinsuch AC and do Y amount of damage per round..."
i started another thread about letting PCs learn these... but I guess it is something that only comes up if you have ALOT of abjurer wizards show up... even 2 knowing that could just be something special and you can say the other 150 abjurers in the world (including the PCs) didn't have that.Even then, you can obscure a fair amount of combat math just due to the nonspecific nature of AC and HP. Its harder to justify when every Abjurer Wizard you encounter can use a magical attack called Arcane Bolt and the only Abjurers that can't are you and your PC friends.
They changed the rules for a subset of monsters mid-stream. Did you really not know what I meant? They removed a significant number of spells from a given monster and replaced some of them with very similar effects which are now, for reasons that matter only to gameplay, no longer spells.No they didn't. As someone pointed out to me in another thread, these non-spell spell attacks have been around sound launch. The Lich is an example.
That should be the answer, yes. But the real answer from WotC is, "That's just the way it is."I mean that is just built into this edition (Brute you deal double the dice of damage on a melee hit) and I would say "That knight was trained to use the armor and sword better than you are... maybe next time make friends with and learn from the knight instead of killing it and taking it's stuff"
i started another thread about letting PCs learn these... but I guess it is something that only comes up if you have ALOT of abjurer wizards show up... even 2 knowing that could just be something special and you can say the other 150 abjurers in the world (including the PCs) didn't have that.
It's like a sorcerer taking fireball at level 5 and haste at the next level they get a spell known, and complaining "Why did the last 3 NPC sorcerers have counterspell and I don't" the answer should be the same "Its just a trick you haven't learned"