Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bacon Bits" data-source="post: 7294024" data-attributes="member: 6777737">Well, except for spells that say, &quot;At Higher Levels&quot;.&nbsp; It's still easy enough to force a die roll.The problem I have here is that #2 and #3 work against each other.&nbsp; #2 is a narrative explanation.&nbsp; That's fine.&nbsp; I prefer narrative explanations!&nbsp; However, the reasoning here doesn't work with the mechanics of a spotter.Imagine this.&nbsp; You're playing a game where a machine drops a meter stick.&nbsp; Your job is to catch the meter stick as quickly as possible.&nbsp; The shorter the distance the meter stick has fallen, the higher your score.&nbsp; You may have played this game in grade school as a reflex test.&nbsp; Now imagine we change the game.&nbsp; The second game is just like the first, except you're wearing a blindfold.&nbsp; Additionally, a partner next to you can tell you when to catch the ruler.&nbsp; Which game do you think you'd do better at?&nbsp; You're now reacting to your partner's reaction instead of the ruler dropping, and your partner is reacting to the ruler dropping.&nbsp; It's not possible to be faster at the second game.&nbsp; So, if #2 is correct that it would take too much time to see a spell, identify it, and cast counterspell by yourself, then by that reasoning #3 also doesn't work because it must take more time to react to another person and cast counterspell when that person had to react to the spell, identify it, and shout out what it was.#3 also doesn't work, but that's primarily because a familiar isn't going to be able to identify a spell.&nbsp; A Cat is about as intelligent a familiar as you can get, and they have Int 3.&nbsp; Making a DC 15 Arcana (Intelligence) check when your roll is d20 - 4 (Int) + 0 (non-proficient) is pretty unlikely.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bacon Bits, post: 7294024, member: 6777737"] Well, except for spells that say, "At Higher Levels". It's still easy enough to force a die roll. The problem I have here is that #2 and #3 work against each other. #2 is a narrative explanation. That's fine. I prefer narrative explanations! However, the reasoning here doesn't work with the mechanics of a spotter. Imagine this. You're playing a game where a machine drops a meter stick. Your job is to catch the meter stick as quickly as possible. The shorter the distance the meter stick has fallen, the higher your score. You may have played this game in grade school as a reflex test. Now imagine we change the game. The second game is just like the first, except you're wearing a blindfold. Additionally, a partner next to you can tell you when to catch the ruler. Which game do you think you'd do better at? You're now reacting to your partner's reaction instead of the ruler dropping, and your partner is reacting to the ruler dropping. It's [I]not possible[/I] to be faster at the second game. So, if #2 is correct that it would take too much time to see a spell, identify it, and cast [I]counterspell[/I] by yourself, then by that reasoning #3 also doesn't work because it [I]must[/I] take more time to react to another person and cast [I]counterspell[/I] when that person had to react to the spell, identify it, and shout out what it was. #3 also doesn't work, but that's primarily because a familiar isn't going to be able to identify a spell. A Cat is about as intelligent a familiar as you can get, and they have Int [I]3[/I]. Making a DC 15 Arcana (Intelligence) check when your roll is d20 - 4 (Int) + 0 (non-proficient) is pretty unlikely. [/QUOTE]

Verification