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

[Parmandur]

That's how it's written, but there have been way too many vaguely worded and poorly phrased sentences in this edition for me to be confident that's what they actually meant.

I'm not sure how I would personally rule this ability. On one hand, it definitely strengthens Counterspell if you don't even need to see the spell casting. On the other hand, it's Vecna and magic, so sensing it would A) make sense, and B) make it feel like Vecna is super powerful which is what he's supposed to be. Okay. Just writing that out helped me make the decision.

They tens to be very careful, actually, but use natural language which has multivaliant possibilities. Making Vecna ridiculously super powerful by being able to actually cheat at Magic is so on-brand that I believe it is intentional.

 

[Flamestrike]

They tens to be very careful, actually, but use natural language which has multivaliant possibilities. Making Vecna ridiculously super powerful by being able to actually cheat at Magic is so on-brand that I believe it is intentional.

I dont see it that way. If Vecna had the ability to -know- a spell was being cast with no components (an impossibility) we'd know about it.

 

[Parmandur]

I dont see it that way. If Vecna had the ability to -know- a spell was being cast with no components (an impossibility) we'd know about it.

Yea, as I said, he's cheating because he knows secrets. He's monster-trucking Vecna, timey-whiney He Who Must Not Be Named master of all secrets.

It works in the narrative, amd makes sense of the clear gramaticL construction that he doesn't need to see the casting, just the caster.

 

[Charlaquin]

How does Paul the Fighter 2 know they need to Action Surge?

What are you talking about? When they want to hit something more and faster than usual.

 

[Charlaquin]

For me, it simply the English grammar if Dead Counterspell: it clearly states that the only two conditions are Vecna seeing the creature, and the creature casting a Spell. This is very specifically notvworded like normal Counterspell, which is designed to allow stuff like Subtle Spell to interfere.

It’s a significant stretch for me to assume that this very minor difference of wording was a conscious attempt to indicate that he can use the ability on a spell that has no visible indication and not a simple product of inconsistent templating due to the “natural language” approach. But even if I swallow that horse-sized pill, there’s still the problem of Vecna somehow consciously responding to something he isn’t consciously aware of.

 

[Leatherhead]

Surely you can see someone speaking in addition to hearing them. Unless every spellcaster is taking power words for their ventriloquism act, I'd have trouble with that reading of it. Though maybe the time to react is the difference in your power word being "kill" vs "snuffleupagus".

The amount of creatures that don't have a functional mouth for speaking in D&D, including PC races, is only going to get bigger from here. Best to future-proof the work.

 

[Charlaquin]

Here is another example:

If you have a creature that is immune to non-magical weapons, they are in the dark and cannot see, and they are hit by a non-magical sword (which they do not know is non-magic at the time)....do they cast shield?

Why would they cast shield even if they could perceive the attack, when it can’t even do damage to them?

The weapon would do no damage (so no "pain"). The creature was in the dark and couldn't see the attack being made. So could the creature really know that its been "hit by a weapon?" Yet the wording of the spell suggests that yes, the shield spell is still possible. And even if you rule that the weight of the weapon gave them enough of a clue when they get struck....that means the shield spell activates literally after the sword cuts into the person...and somehow alters time and retcons the actual physical contact in the first place.

So, what you’re saying is, even if the wording of a reaction ability indicates that the conditions to use it have been met, it might still not make sense for them to use it if they aren’t aware the conditions are met. I agree, which is exactly why I’m not convinced Vecna can use Dread Counterspell on a spell he isn’t aware is being cast.

The point of this example is that reactions can play pretty loose with the concept of "perceiving" that things are happening and the timing of when they can occur. Why does the perception of the spellcasting have to happen at the moment casting begins? Why can't it be after a magical effect starts to form?

If that was the case, why wouldn’t you be able to use counterspell the same way?

Why can't it be right as the magic is hurled towards its target, and is countered just nanoseconds before it strikes?

Well because it takes more than a nanosecond to say a word, and Dread Counterspell involves uttering a Dread word.

No one has answered how Vecna is supposed to say a word in response to a spell he doesn’t know is being cast. So far the best explanation offered has been “he does know the spell is being cast, even if it doesn’t have any components,” and in conjunction with the passage about him being able to tell what spell is being cast just by looking at the caster, this is almost convincing to me. But I’m still not sold. If someone wants to convince me, this is the angle to go for. I have considered the difference in wording from counterspell and don’t find it a compelling argument. I don’t care whether an interpretation would make Vecna more powerful. But if you can persuade me that the intent is for him to be aware whenever a creature he can see casts a spell, even if the spell has no visible components? That would sell me.

 

[Mort]

It’s a significant stretch for me to assume that this very minor difference of wording was a conscious attempt to indicate that he can use the ability on a spell that has no visible indication and not a simple product of inconsistent templating due to the “natural language” approach. But even if I swallow that horse-sized pill, there’s still the problem of Vecna somehow consciously responding to something he isn’t consciously aware of.

Why is it so problematic that Vecna, one of the supposed greatest practitioners of magic in D&D, and many millennia old even in this non-god form, is able to always know that a spell is being cast in his presence?

And why the massive focus on what is the ability REALLY saying?

Shouldn't the focus be on what would you have it do, IN YOUR GAME, if you were to ever use this version of Vecna?

 

[LadyElect]

The amount of creatures that don't have a functional mouth for speaking in D&D, including PC races, is only going to get bigger from here. Best to future-proof the work.

You know, fair. I hadn't even considered the 'telepathic' speak and its ilk. Although this began largely in reference to PCs where that is much rarer, it's certainly worth writing around when you can.

 

[Stalker0]

If that was the case, why wouldn’t you be able to use counterspell the same way?

My point exactly. The only reason we have that ruling is based on Sage Advice....and though I use SA on some things I don't think anyone 100% agrees with JCs rulings. There is nothing that says subtle spell stops counterspell from working, people just do because it "feels right", not because of any RAW.