D&D 5E Vecna's Dread Counterspell vs. Counterspell -- What's the Diff?

[Charlaquin]

Yes, precisely so. Now, why does Vecna have this open is an RP question that seems easy enough to solve from different angles, and it would have been nice.if the block expanded on that because it seems pretty clear that he is meant to always have it available if the DM sees that it applies.

But it isn’t just an RP question. What knowledge Vecna does or doesn’t have access to is determined by the fictional positioning and the rules of the game. The rules do not clearly indicate whether or not Vecna can detect a spell being cast without a visual or audible indication, and if he does not have such a capability, then the fictional positioning does not allow him to be aware the spell is being cast if it is done subtly. Therefore, if you interpret the choice of whether or not to use Dread Counterspell as Vecna’s, then he cannot use it unless he has some ability to know there is a spell being cast, which RAW is not clear on.

Well that is literally true, so yes that is how I think of it.

We’re bumping into a conflict between gamist and simulationist outlooks on gameplay here. The DM does literally decide whether or not Vecna activates the ability, yes, but for many DMs, that decision is arrived at based on imagining Vecna’s perspective and making decisions as they imagine Vecna would do. From this perspective, the RAW is not clear on whether or not it is something Vecna could choose to do, if the spell has no visible or audible components, even though it would definitely work if he did use it.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

it would be helpful if you would cite or link to the 5e lore that makes it so. Thanks

I think you are fully capable of researching Vecna. This kind of request always seems a bit much to me. I mean, I'm not going to find a specific sentence that says "Vecna always knows when a creature he sees is casting a spell even if they've learned to hide it, say, by NOT doing verbal, somatic, or material components). Simply put: Vecna's entire story involves Knowing Stuff that Others Don't. I honestly think that's sufficient.

And before I get jumped on, I'm not saying that it's an argument winner! It's just a piece of the puzzle, and doesn't need to be given more weight than it's due. Vecna Knows Stuff. It's just a precedent for RAI, no more.

 

[Charlaquin]

But by RAW, it is a valid option. So you need to craft your fiction to fit the RAW.

It is clear from RAW that it would work if he used it. It is not clear from RAW if he would know he could use it, which for many DMs is synonymous with if it’s a valid option.

Sure I could. Just today my daughter order something (sliders) that was not on the menu. The waiter then confirmed they did have them, and she could order them. Not exactly what you are talking about, but this was just 3 hours ago so it was fresh in my mind!

Yes, and if Vecna randomly said the dread word apropos of nothing, and someone he can see coincidentally happened to be casting a subtle spell at the same time, that spell would be countered. But, the point remains that the RAW isn’t clear on whether or not he would know Dread Counterspell was “on the menu.” That may not be important to you, but it is to a LOT of DMs.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I think you are fully capable of researching Vecna. This kind of request always seems a bit much to me. I mean, I'm not going to find a specific sentence that says "Vecna always knows when a creature he sees is casting a spell even if they've learned to hide it, say, by NOT doing verbal, somatic, or material components). Simply put: Vecna's entire story involves Knowing Stuff that Others Don't. I honestly think that's sufficient.

And before I get jumped on, I'm not saying that it's an argument winner! It's just a piece of the puzzle, and doesn't need to be given more weight than it's due. Vecna Knows Stuff. It's just a precedent for RAI, no more.

I'm not the one claiming the lore explains the RAI. But I can't force you to back up your point. It was just a request.
There's lots of stuff out there so if you actually had found something, it would be interesting to see that specific piece of lore. Whatevs.

 

[dave2008]

it would be helpful if you would cite or link to the 5e lore that makes it so. Thanks

I already posted it in this thread. It is from the adventure that came out with Vecna. But here it is again:

Vecna’s Combat Tactics
Vecna can ascertain the capabilities of spellcasters and identify the spells they cast without making an ability check. He will try to disable or kill characters in the group he suspects has magic that can restore hit points or revive others. Additionally, if a character is missing a left eye or left hand, Vecna will target them with spells he casts, suspecting the missing parts were offered to the Cruel Gate.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

We’re bumping into a conflict between gamist and simulationist outlooks on gameplay here. The DM does literally decide whether or not Vecna activates the ability, yes, but for many DMs, that decision is arrived at based on imagining Vecna’s perspective and making decisions as they imagine Vecna would do. From this perspective, the RAW is not clear on whether or not it is something Vecna could choose to do, if the spell has no visible or audible components, even though it would definitely work if he did use it.

If you're trying to get into Vecna's head to make your rulings, then why would you say you don't care about his lore and only about RAW? It seems that you switch back and forth between talking about Fluff and Rules whenever it suits you as a counter-argument.

(Please take this as a friendly jab, meant as such): And to think, I recently defended how reasonable you are!

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm not the one claiming the lore explains the RAI. But I can't force you to back up your point. It was just a request.
There's lots of stuff out there so if you actually had found something, it would be interesting to see that specific piece of lore. Whatevs.

All I claimed was that it was "evidence to support the theory" - and I meant that in a conversational way, not a trial-by-jury.

 

[Charlaquin]

You asked earlier for RAI. Lore is the reason for RAI. The designers love lore. It's the only reason I brought it up.

Lore may be a reason for some RAI. Other RAI may be motivated by a desire to create a particular gameplay state. There are many possible reasons for RAI. But I want to understand what the RAI is, and the lore doesn’t actually help me figure that out.

Vecna's lore suggesting that he could do these things is evidence for why the designers may have worded it that way on purpose.

May have doesn’t help me.

You seem to have dug your heels in pretty hard here, when you start to tell people that you don't care about their reasonable explanations.

Your reasonable explanation is coming from the opposite direction to how I formulate my understanding of the rules. It therefore isn’t helpful to me, and I apologize, but I’m getting a little frustrated at all the attempts to justify how it could work in the narrative when what I keep asking for is textual evidence of how it’s supposed to work.

 

[dave2008]

It is clear from RAW that it would work if he used it. It is not clear from RAW if he would know he could use it, which for many DMs is synonymous with if it’s a valid option.

Yes, and if Vecna randomly said the dread word apropos of nothing, and someone he can see coincidentally happened to be casting a subtle spell at the same time, that spell would be countered. But, the point remains that the RAW isn’t clear on whether or not he would know Dread Counterspell was “on the menu.” That may not be important to you, but it is to a LOT of DMs.

My point is, and always has been, that the RAW is clear. You disagree and we are not going to convince each other. Like I said, I've spent too much time on this conversation, so I am moving on. I just didn't want you to think I was ignoring you. Thank you for your thoughts and concerns - have a great day!

PS I could see were a clarification would help you, but that is not something I, or anyone on these boards, can give you. You need the devs to give you that.

 

[Mort]

He does not need to be aware for Dread Counterspell to be a valid option for him to choose. However, I contend that he could not choose it unless he was aware it’s a valid option. If a restaurant offers cake but that cake isn’t on the menu, I can’t order it even though they offer it.

You are assuming Dread Counterspell works like counterspell, where the caster has to know the spell is happening BEFORE it affects him.

What if, instead, it works like shield - where the player decides AFTER he's been hit that, no, maybe he hasn't:

DM: The baddie hit's your AC of 15...

Player: Wait, Shield, does he hit an AC of 20?

DM: Nope, that's a miss.

Maybe Vecna, unlike EVERY other spellcaster can counter AFTER the spell manifests and/or even affects him, so him knowing it's being cast DOESN'T EVEN MATTER. as it doesn't seem to matter by the RAW of the ability.

How do you justify shield in your game?