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

[Maxperson]

Plus none of us are going to be able to realistically portray a thousands-years-old genius.

That's true, but we can start by setting it up so that a common, low level spell that he has known about and had to deal with for millennia won't defeat or even inconvenience him.

 

[Maxperson]

1 at 7th level or lower 'just here for this thing you aren't here for'
2 at 15th level or higher and he will have EVERY thing planned out
3 as a patron.

Same, except that I doubt I'd ever use #1. First, I like to keep things this awe inspiring(Meeting gods, Vecna, etc.) to higher levels. Second, I've seen too many groups that would do something(that might even have made sense to the player(s) at the time) that would simply cause a Vecna TPK. I'd want them to at least be tough enough to have a chance to run away if things went south.

 

[MarkB]

That's true, but we can start by setting it up so that a common, low level spell that he has known about and had to deal with for millennia won't defeat or even inconvenience him.

Sure, and I'm willing to believe he has some excellent defenses set up against it. I just don't think they're going to consist of standing off to the side of the doorway.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Forgetting that this is the "whole" version of Vecna,

So he hasn't even had the chance to learn by getting got by the Gilligan to his Skipper.

You'd think, with his secret knowledge, Milenia experience and all answering "what is the sound of one hand clapping?" would be a cinch for the guy.

Bart Simpson did it, but then he's far more ageless and powerful than Vecna.

 

[Charlaquin]

But after you know whether you would be hit or not...

You also cast counterspell after you know whether they would have cast a spell or not.

 

[Parmandur]

Natural language is the use of the language as the people using that language normally perceive its meaning. "Diagraming" the sentence to show how its meaning varies "technically" from natural language is pointless. Natural language use often not proper and people say and write things "incorrectly" all the time but the meaning is naturally understood.

In the two examples I wrote, people using English in normal context would not see a difference between those two statements, as (at least) @LadyElect seems to understand that (but then went on to change the wording with a different example, which isn't how either feature is written...). To say "that is" in this context simple means "in the process of."

Anyway, so @Parmandur and @dave2008, can Vecna use Dread Counterspell on someone NOT casting a spell? Because according to "your diagraming" he should be able to, all that matters is he "sees a creature". Frankly, IMO that's ridiculous since the purpose of the feature is to stop spells and the natural language makes "interrupt a creature he can see casting a spell" what is important really. After all, if the creature isn't casting a spell, Vecna makes no check, and the creature takes no damage.

Other than those two phrases, "that is" and "in the process of", the features core are the same: "interrupt a creature (he/you) can see casting a spell". The only real difference is Vecna can use it without the 60' limit.

I have a minor in English and have taught English at University level while in the Peace Corps in Europe (Ukraine, specifically) and a master's in Education and a Master's in Mathematics. I know language (ESPECIALLY ENGLISH) can have meanings "twisted" just like statistics can. When you get down to technically analyzing statements, you are going beyond the natural use of the language.


Not a "mistake" so much as just a different use of figures of speech and wording. There are many ways to convey an idea using slightly different wording, but the meaning is the same.

Now, let me ask this: if Dread Counterspell was written "who is" instead of "that is", would that make any difference?


Did I? It doesn't really sound like something I would do, especially since I don't really care that much, so maybe it was someone else? Or it might have been me... You'd have to dig up the post--I don't recall it anyway.

Diagramming sentences is part of natural language, particulate wayBworC uses it. Yes, Dread Counterapell requires the creature to be casrimg: but as written it does not require thar Vecna see the casting. In the natural language reading.

 

[Parmandur]

I know, but it's just weird that some abilities work that way and others don't, without much explanation as to how/why that works.

Because Magic.

 

[Parmandur]

If Vecna's feature was this:



I would agree with you completely that Vecna simply has to see the creature.

But as it stands, it is a reaction. A reaction to what? A creature that is casting a spell. If Subtle Spell is used and there are only V,S components, how does Vecna know a spell is being cast? Without knowing that, he has no reason to use his reaction to try to stop it. If he doesn't use his reaction, he isn't using the feature.

And FWIW, three opinions, regardless of how knowledgeable they appear to be ( ) when everyone I've spoken with agrees there is no difference in the language used between "that is" and "in the process of" in this instance. You have your experts, I have mine.

Unfortunately, with natural language, 5E is rife with such issues, such as Flurry of Blows:

View attachment 251628

Does the wording "Immediately after you take the Attack action on your turn" mean:

1. You take the Attack action to make an attack, then you can initiate Flurry of Blows, then finish with Extra Attack, OR
2. You take the Attack action to make an attack, and an Extra Attack, and then you can initiate Flurry of Blows.

How important is the word "immediately" in this case? What about the phrase "after you take the Attack action"?

And what about moving between the attack action and beginning your Flurry? Can you move or does "immediately" mean you can't move? Is this a case of the specific "immediately" trumping the general rule you can move between attacks?

Does "after you take the Attack action" mean you have to complete it? Or once you make an attack, is that enough?

FWIW, JC seems content to rule immediately still allows you to move, but after you take the Attack action means you must finish Extra Attack before you can begin the Flurry.

To make his take stick, a better writing would be: "After you finish taking the Attack action, you can spend 1 ki....". This way it is clear you must finish your Attack action (which includes any Extra Attack) and then spend ki to gain the bonus action. By removing the word immediately, you can also move before using your bonus action.

But IMO "immediately" means immediately--you can't move, but "after you take the Attack action" means you've attacked, it doesn't say "after you finish your Attack action." After all, your bonus action is separate from your action, so is separate from your attack (usually?).

You might not agree (which is fine--my apologies for getting you so frustrated), but the fact remains 5E's use of natural languages leads to WAY TOO MUCH interpretation--even between experts. A few key changes in the wording, and the intent becomes much clearer (see my rewrite of Dread Interruption above... IF that was their intent at least).

That's simple, Extra Attack is part of a single Attack Action. The Bonus Action can be activated after the full Atack Action.

 

[dave2008]

Did I? It doesn't really sound like something I would do, especially since I don't really care that much, so maybe it was someone else? Or it might have been me... You'd have to dig up the post--I don't recall it anyway.

I just wanted to get back and let you know I was mistaken, it was not you. My apologies! The poster that made that claim is now banned actually!

 

[DND_Reborn]

I just wanted to get back and let you know I was mistaken, it was not you. My apologies! The poster that made that claim is now band actually!

No worries! I honestly didn't recall doing that... so I am glad I am not losing my memory.