Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9214549" data-attributes="member: 6801228">So, you declare they are recognized by "anyone with the training" which would imply proficiency, and now they are just recognized because they are recognized with no training? And the language of Fire isn't a mystical language? You never explained that actually, what makes the Language of Fire NOT a mystical language?Nothing in any books says that Int 3 can recognize words. In fact, many creatures with an INT 3 specifically do not understand any language. So, this reads like special pleading for the thing you made up to just have the exact properties you need it to have.I do not know how you know, it is a function of magic. The rules simply state that I know. You cannot claim that knowing the words is required because1) There is no requirement that counterspell can only be used by a caster or someone with spellcasting. A creature with a boon or a magical item could still cast counterspell. 2) There is no requirement to hear a spell being cast. Deaf creatures can counterspell. 3) There is no requirement to understand what spellcasting is, extreme low INT beings can still utilize Counterspell.I do not need to show that the DMG is lying. That is ludicrous. The PHB contains the general, baseline rules, this is true. The Monster Manual contains monsters, this is also true. The Monster Manual ADDITIONALLY contains rules. The rules for the monsters, which are contained in the Monster Manual. Using the PHB, you cannot describe how a Burrow Speed works. Using the PHB, you cannot describe how Tremorsense works. Using the PHB, you cannot describe how Proficiency works for creatures that do not have Levels. Using the PHB, you cannot describe how a mid-combat recharge of an ability using a die works.These are rules. These are very explicitly rules. Just like the rules in the PHB for swimming, darkvision, short rest recharges and proficiency by level.If it states that when I see an Iso-Flux activating, I can cast this spell to destroy it, then I can. There is no requirement to know what it looks like. You also cannot cast a reaction spell that does not have the proper trigger. A player can't declare they cast shield when someone walks over to them. The trigger is not met, so the spell cannot be cast.Yes, if I choose to use that rule, it would work that way to identify the nature of the spell. How would I know to use my reaction to try and discern the nature of the spellcasting, if I am deaf and otherwise would have no idea what I am looking at? Would I still be able to make the attempt? By your standards.. no, I would not. If I were deaf, I would be incapable of identifying a spell. However, yet again, this requirement is not in the Xanathar's rules. You simply need to see the creature.If they are casting a spell, they are not doing nothing. They are casting a spell. And the counterspell can be activated when you see a creature casting a spell. If moving your lips to move your lips, you are not spellcasting. If moving your lips to spellcast, you are spellcasting. Must there be some X factor to make this make sense to our human senses? Sure, but that can be a factor of a Non-euclidean, magical world, which we do not exist within.</blockquote>

Verification