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

[Charlaquin]

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.

What I’m trying to understand is if the intent is for Vecna to be able to know a spell is being cast when he can’t see or hear it. That’s not just “fluff,” and it’s not something the lore can tell me. That’s rules information that I am so far unconvinced that the text makes clear.

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

 

[FitzTheRuke]

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.

I tell you, I'm a little (only slightly) frustrated that from my perspective, you've been given tons of textual evidence on how it's supposed to work (I admit, not by me, I care more about story and appealing to reason). You just don't seem to "care".

 

[FitzTheRuke]

What I’m trying to understand is if the intent is for Vecna to be able to know a spell is being cast when he can’t see or hear it. That’s not just “fluff,” and it’s not something the lore can tell me. That’s rules information that I am so far unconvinced that the text makes clear.

But... Vecna "knowing stuff" is not defined in RAW anywhere that I can think of. It IS, however, his whole deal when it comes to lore. Hence, why I keep speaking of it.

Is there somewhere I'm not aware of that directly connects a character knowing ANYTHING to any rules? (Aside from Crawford tweets, which are not rules?)

 

[Charlaquin]

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!

You too.

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.

I mean, I haven’t read the adventure in detail. Someone could theoretically point to a passage that I may have missed, which in conjunction with the other cited passage and the wording of the spell provided a preponderance of evidence that the devs did intend for Vecna to be aware of spells he can’t see or hear being cast. Maybe no further textual evidence exists, but I wanted to offer anyone who may have come across something to point it out. In response, I have been met with breakdowns of the wording of Dread Counterspell that I never disagreed with in the first place, and vague allusions to lore about how Vecna’s the lord of secrets so he can know whatever you want him to know.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

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.

Yes, that's a good start - thank you for posting.
It doesn't actually indicate that Vecna has some preternatural sense of the weave being tapped though, does it?

 

[Charlaquin]

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:

If it worked that way, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation.

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.

Maybe that’s the case, but if it is, it isn’t clear from the text. Which is what I’ve been saying this whole time. It’s not clear.

How do you justify shield in your game?

The caster can see that they’re going to get hit, and cast spell just before the attack hits them.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

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.

I apologize then. I wasn't trying to make you feel like you were on trial or that you needed to prove anything. I'm here to learn things that might improve my understanding of the game and was hoping you had something to share that I hadn't seen before. That's all.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I apologize then. I wasn't trying to make you feel like you were on trial or that you needed to prove anything. I'm here to learn things that might improve my understanding of the game and was hoping you had something to share that I hadn't seen before. That's all.

Ah. I'm very glad to hear it, and I'm sorry if I was a bit snippy with you. So often here when someone asks one to post proof, (like in the way you did), it's a very chest-out, "PROVE IT!" kind of thing (or at least, it very often seems that way).

If you thought I had some revealing tidbit that I was holding back on, no, I'm afraid it's no more than Vecna Knows Stuff. (Other than the bit from the adventure, but that was posted twice in this thread).

 

[Swarmkeeper]

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?

If only Dread Counterspell was worded similarly to Shield, we would all be on the same page. Maybe...

 

[Maxperson]

Can't quite agree with this.

Here are phrases about the target from Dread Counterspell and Counterspell:

DCs: "a creature he can see that is casting a spell"
Cs: "you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell"
Cs: "a creature in the process of casting a spell"

Sorry, perhaps I'm no grammar wizard (College of Scribes?) but, to me, this difference does seem either small or sloppy or both.... or, another take is: there is no difference. If it were super clear, this discussion wouldn't be happening.


That said, please explain the difference, if there is one, between:

"a creature... that is casting a spell"

and either:

"a creature in the process of casting a spell"
or
"a creature... casting a spell"


(and, FWIW, I honestly still don't know 100% how I'd rule a Subtle Spell vs Dread Counterspell)

With dread counterspell there are two conditions. You need to see a creature and that creature needs to be casting a spell. It does not say or imply that you need to see the spellcasting itself. Only the creature.

With counterspell you need to see a creature casting a spell, which says you need to see both.