Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7180045" data-attributes="member: 29398">Well, actually, timing finesses like MtG are needed in order to allow the in-game fiction to make any sense whatsoever.First basic assumption: every casting of a given spell pretty much works the same.&nbsp; When you cast Fireball it's just the same as when I cast Fireball...it takes the same amount of time, we go through the same motions, and we produce a ball of fire somewhere nearby.&nbsp; All agreed?Second assumption: some spells are quicker to cast than other spells.&nbsp; Counterspell, for example, is quicker to cast than Fireball (reaction vs. action).&nbsp; All agreed?Third assumption: successful interruption of a spell normally causes that spell to fail or fizzle or whatever term you like.&nbsp; All agreed?And so, given those assumptions, let me introduce you to the rabbit holes.&nbsp; There are several.Rabbit hole #1 - interruption.&nbsp; To cast Counterspell I by definition have to interrupt the spell I'm already casting...I can't normally cast two spells at once, and a counterspell effect isn't a built-in feature of a normal Fireball...and so my Fireball should be lost either by my own interruption of it or by it being countered by my foe.&nbsp; But the rules say it resolves...wtf?Rabbit hole #2 - timing.&nbsp; If any given spell is always the same as in assumption 1 above, if my enemy's Counterspell starts first then - even if we allow me to react to it and interrupt myself to cast my own Counterspell - then his should and must resolve before mine does, as mine takes the same amount of in-game time as his and he started casting first.&nbsp; But instead we have last-in-first-out, based on the MtG &quot;stack&quot; rules, which is kinda ridiculous in the fiction - but there's your timing finesse.&nbsp; In short, it should be impossible to Counterspell a Counterspell.Rabbit hole #3 - concentration.&nbsp; If I can interrupt my concentration on casting Fireball enough to cast another spell and then resume my Fireball, I can by extension then interrupt my concentration at all sorts of other times to do all sorts of other things using the same logic.&nbsp; End result: concentration becomes a much weaker mechanical restraint on casters.Dumb rule.Lan-&quot;the sad part is that this would be so easy to fix or errata, but it hasn't been done&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7180045, member: 29398"] Well, actually, timing finesses like MtG are needed in order to allow the in-game fiction to make any sense whatsoever. First basic assumption: every casting of a given spell pretty much works the same. When you cast Fireball it's just the same as when I cast Fireball...it takes the same amount of time, we go through the same motions, and we produce a ball of fire somewhere nearby. All agreed? Second assumption: some spells are quicker to cast than other spells. Counterspell, for example, is quicker to cast than Fireball (reaction vs. action). All agreed? Third assumption: successful interruption of a spell normally causes that spell to fail or fizzle or whatever term you like. All agreed? And so, given those assumptions, let me introduce you to the rabbit holes. There are several. Rabbit hole #1 - interruption. To cast Counterspell I by definition have to interrupt the spell I'm already casting...I can't normally cast two spells at once, and a counterspell effect isn't a built-in feature of a normal Fireball...and so my Fireball should be lost either by my own interruption of it or by it being countered by my foe. But the rules say it resolves...wtf? Rabbit hole #2 - timing. If any given spell is always the same as in assumption 1 above, if my enemy's Counterspell starts first then - even if we allow me to react to it and interrupt myself to cast my own Counterspell - then his should and must resolve before mine does, as mine takes the same amount of in-game time as his and he started casting first. But instead we have last-in-first-out, based on the MtG "stack" rules, which is kinda ridiculous in the fiction - but there's your timing finesse. In short, it should be impossible to Counterspell a Counterspell. Rabbit hole #3 - concentration. If I can interrupt my concentration on casting Fireball enough to cast another spell and then resume my Fireball, I can by extension then interrupt my concentration at all sorts of other times to do all sorts of other things using the same logic. End result: concentration becomes a much weaker mechanical restraint on casters. Dumb rule. Lan-"the sad part is that this would be so easy to fix or errata, but it hasn't been done"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification