D&D 5E Vs Vecna battle simulations.

[MonsterEnvy]

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.

 

[Flamestrike]

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!

 

[Flamestrike]

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

 

[Flamestrike]

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.

 

[Flamestrike]

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]

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.

 

[Greg Benage]

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]

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.

 

[Flamestrike]

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).

 

[Flamestrike]

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?