D&D 5E Vs Vecna battle simulations.

Treeantmonk recognized a serious weakness in the build yes. But my point was they WERE optimized-ish enough to exploit it, they didn't need further. And the high initiative and assuming a 20+ (so about 50% chance by the build) was generous and necessary for the stomping to occur.
All monsters can be countered if you know what your are doing.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Regular Counterepell says "see a person casting a spell..." So yes, you have to see the caster casting a spell. Subtle spell prevents this, you cannot counter.

Vecna's version: Vecna utters a dread word to interrupt a creature he can see that is casting a spell. Vecna had to see them and they have to be casting a spell, if both are true, he can dread Counterepell.

So he DOES NOT have to see the target casting, he just has to see the target. Subtle spell shouldn't stop it Otherwise, why word it differently?

And regardless, it completely FITS with Vecna to interpret the ability this way. He SHOULD be a nightmare to spellcasters, that's kind of his thing.

The trigger for Vecnas counter is that Vacna needs to be able to see a target that is casting a spell.

Vecna doesn't know his target is casting a (subtle) spell though.

Without that knowledge, there is no trigger for that reaction.

You can't react to something you're not aware is happening!
 

Confusing it with tremorsense.


You're kinda making that up. I mean, it's fine - I get why you might think that s spell being cast with no VSM component means no one can tell that you are casting a spell, but there really isn't anything that I know of that says that is explicitly so.

Im not making it up. Crawford himself has stated that you can't react to something you don't know is happening, specifically in traction to a spell lacking any S M or M components
 

Screenshot_20220619-133946_Chrome.jpg


If Vecna can't see a creature casting a spell (because it's being cast with subtle Metamagic and lacks M components) he can't use his reaction because he didn't perceive its trigger.
 

Treatmonk just ran a simulation with TWO completely non-optimized ordinary human fighters level 20 and no magic items. They killed Vecna before Vecna got a single turn.


His maths is off, and he white rooms it (Vecna could teleport behind full cover after the first bit), and he ignores Vecnas Int of 24 and Scrying abilities.
 

Mort

Legend
Supporter
View attachment 251410

If Vecna can't see a creature casting a spell (because it's being cast with subtle Metamagic and lacks M components) he can't use his reaction because he didn't perceive its trigger.

This is in response to regular Counterepell, which, sure the caster most see the spell being cast.

Vecna's is not worded the same way, it requires Vecna to see the target AND that they are casting not that he see the target casting. You can't use Crawford's ruling for vecna's version.
 

He's definitely weak for his CR, and in this simulation, he's just lucky the rogue is the only archer. But my biggest complaint is how this fight is going: He's got some spell denial and good mobility, but otherwise, really all he can do is damage, and he can't do nearly enough, fast enough, to press a high-level party. His best (only) control option is dominate monster, and a single-target control spell rarely carries its weight in action economy against a party of adventurers. He has no defense or real rejuvenation. The result is that this doesn't feel, in the slightest, like a battle against an arch-lich.

I also understand that battlefield control abilities are going to be more challenging for the DM than straightforward damage-dealing, but...Vecna's gotta have it IMHO.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
he can't do nearly enough
Yep. Flight of the Damned is barely better (damage-wise) than a fireball at 36 points on average. Sure, it has a much larger area of effect and has the frightened condition, but that isn't very strong IMO. His AC is so low that even with disadvantage he will get hit quite a bit.
 

This is in response to regular Counterepell, which, sure the caster most see the spell being cast.

Vecna's is not worded the same way, it requires Vecna to see the target AND that they are casting not that he see the target casting. You can't use Crawford's ruling for vecna's version.

But Vecna doesn't know the spell is being cast. It has no components. There is no perceivable trigger for him to react to.

If he doesnt know you've casting a spell (and he doesnt) then he cant take the reaction. The same logic applies (and the same logic for every reaction, in that the trigger needs to be a perceivable and perceived trigger).
 

Vecna's version: Vecna utters a dread word to interrupt a creature he can see that is casting a spell. Vecna had to see them and they have to be casting a spell, if both are true, he can dread Counterepell.

No, Vecna has to KNOW they're casting a spell.

Would you allow a readied action with the trigger of 'When a creature I can see is casting a spell, my attack happens' to go off with a Stilled spell?

If so, how does the creature know the trigger has just occurred?
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
His maths is off, and he white rooms it (Vecna could teleport behind full cover after the first bit), and he ignores Vecnas Int of 24 and Scrying abilities.

His math is not off (you can't just declare math is off without showing the math is off) and he's not white rooming it he's using the room Vecna is in for the adventure and the tactics WOTC published in their Vecna video! Nor does Vecna get a turn to teleport, he's dead. But even if he did, the tactics WOTC state in the video is that he doesn't do that.
 

Stalker0

Legend
Treeantmonk recognized a serious weakness in the build yes. But my point was they WERE optimized-ish enough to exploit it, they didn't need further. And the high initiative and assuming a 20+ (so about 50% chance by the build) was generous and necessary for the stomping to occur.
With respect, if you think that all you need at 20th level to optimize is a 20 in your prime stat and one feat....you have never seen a truly optimized 20th level character:)

Yes Treantmonk made a few mistakes in his analysis but the result was telling...after all, he only used 2 characters!....TWO!!!! And no magic items at 20th level!

So going back to the Monk/Pillar thing....I am genuinely confused as to why the monk felt he needed to attack the pillar in the first place....was it to get a flurry attack against Vecna without triggering his reaction on the first attack?


Is it perhaps time we made a thread commenting on this thread, so we leave this thread clean for the people to actually run their simulation, and all of our debate noise gets pushed to the side? I do feel bad reading the last 3 pages and its nothing but commentary as opposed to the actual simulation.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
His math is not off (you can't just declare math is off without showing the math is off)
It is off (slightly) because of his assumption about using Lucky and that he adds full 14 damage for arcane shot (instead of multiplying it by the 0.55 hit probability). The DPR is closer to 129-130, his was too high. Regardless, the point stands that such damage would be close to defeating Vecna by two fighters, and with a bit of good damage rolls, would defeat him. 🤷‍♂️

So going back to the Monk/Pillar thing....I am genuinely confused as to why the monk felt he needed to attack the pillar in the first place....was it to get a flurry attack against Vecna without triggering his reaction on the first attack?
Yes. That is why I did it. People have claimed it is a bit cheesy (which it is LOL), but it is no different than if a skeleton or zombie minion was next to Vecna and I had the monk hit the minion to activate Flurry first before using it on Vecna.

Also, in doing some more rule research after the fact I posted how it was something I didn't even need to do: he could have grappled Vecna without triggering Fell Rebuke (which requires a "hit" and grappling is not a hit). In the same respect, Leon in round one, post #162, (who grappled Vecna) would have been able to attack to smite since Venca should not have used Fell Rebuke then, either. So, that was my error in not realizing a grapple is not a hit.

Depending on how you want to rule the attack requirement of Flurry of Blows, you get a couple variants here as well.

1. Grapple (Attack), Flurry, Flurry, Strike (Extra Attack)
You have taken the attack action, so my use Flurry prior to finishing the attack action.

2. Grapple (Attack), Knock Prone (Extra Attack), Flurry, Flurry.
You must complete attack action, including Extra Attack, prior to Flurry.

From what I have found, JC rules along with option 2, although I would DM option 1 is fine. Regardless, it all works out to the same result in the end: Vecna -- grappled, prone, and no reactions until the end of Hjalman's next turn.

I do feel bad reading the last 3 pages and its nothing but commentary as opposed to the actual simulation.
I am waiting on others to chime in on ruling whether or not Leon's Improved Divine Smite will work in the Antimagic Field... I asked for others to give their views, and nothing on that. 🤷‍♂️

Sage Advice is IDS should work, but that means he can make melee weapon attacks (as "magical" enough???) to deal damage to Vecna... I think?
 

MarkB

Legend
I am waiting on others to chime in on ruling whether or not Leon's Improved Divine Smite will work in the Antimagic Field... I asked for others to give their views, and nothing on that. 🤷‍♂️

Sage Advice is IDS should work, but that means he can make melee weapon attacks (as "magical" enough???) to deal damage to Vecna... I think?
Improved Divine Smite certainly feels magical, but it's a borderline case. I'd probably let it work. That way the paladin at least gets to deal some damage, since his weapons are now mundane rather than magical and will deal no piercing, bludgeoning or slashing damage to Vecna.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Improved Divine Smite certainly feels magical, but it's a borderline case. I'd probably let it work. That way the paladin at least gets to deal some damage, since his weapons are now mundane rather than magical and will deal no piercing, bludgeoning or slashing damage to Vecna.
So, I was thinking it would be 1d8 for the IDS but also 1d8 for his sword and +3 for Strength. It sounds like you are thinking just the 1d8 for IDS and nothing else??
 

MarkB

Legend
So, I was thinking it would be 1d8 for the IDS but also 1d8 for his sword and +3 for Strength. It sounds like you are thinking just the 1d8 for IDS and nothing else??
I don't think there's any case for making physical weapons count as magical while in an antimagic field. The rules are pretty straightforward on that - they become mundane. The monk's Ki-Empowered Strikes would probably still work, though.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
I don't think there's any case for making physical weapons count as magical while in an antimagic field. The rules are pretty straightforward on that - they become mundane.
So, just 1d8 for IDS then, or add Strength for 1d8+3?

The monk's Ki-Empowered Strikes would probably still work, though.
Actually, they don't (officially???). JC ruled firmly on that one because the are "magical" and the magic is suppressed. 🤷‍♂️
 

MarkB

Legend
So, just 1d8 for IDS then, or add Strength for 1d8+3?
Just the 1d8. The strength bonus is the same damage type as the weapon's base damage.
Actually, they don't (officially???). JC ruled firmly on that one because the are "magical" and the magic is suppressed. 🤷‍♂️
Weird. The exact wording of the ability is that they count as magical for one specific purpose, not that they are magical.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Just the 1d8. The strength bonus is the same damage type as the weapon's base damage.
Gotcha! Ok, thanks for clarifying... If I can get at least 1 or 2 more people, Smythe can take Leon's turn finally.

Weird. The exact wording of the ability is that they count as magical for one specific purpose, not that they are magical.
Yeah, I kind of get it, but ki is represented as mystic, not magical. I would see that as gray area myself. I am fine either way, so let's see how others feel.
 

Again, I'd just use a strict reading of the ruling in the Sage Advice Compendium. Otherwise, if you just try to use common sense about what feels "magical," Vecna can just collapse into a pile of bones.

• Is it a magic item?
• Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
• Is it a spell attack?
• Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
• Does its description say it’s magical?

That's it.
 

The Weather Outside Is Frightful!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top