Adjudicating Readied Actions

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Something came up that made be think about some of the issues not fully
explored by the ready action. Exactly how much control does a readier have
over when their action takes place and exactly what can an interrupted
character do about it? The issue almost came up during our game and an
innovative piece of play allowed a party of 12th level characters to
overcome an ~EL 18 encounter without a single PC casualty.

Allow me to explain. First a little background. The PCs are at their
home base, a fortified large stone house in the middle of a compound and
are attacked by an organization they've been pissing off for a while now.
The force against them is composed of 20 bonded undead warriors (custom
monster, tough fast zombies who can be directly controlled CR 7) a 14th
level Wizard and his 3 10th level subordinates (also Wizards).

The Wizards do not intend to get directly involved in the fight but are
there to control their bonded warriors and overcome the magical alarms on
the compound. To cut a long story short and get to the relevant bit the
PCs manage to successfully "form up" and establish a bottle neck at the
top
of a stairway. Despite being unarmoured they gain the upper hand during
which time the party Sorceress (knowing the nature of the bonded warriors)
dimension doors to the roof top to see who is leading the attack. It is
dark and she is unobserved but spots the Mage and his assistants below.

While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle isn't
going as planned and have made their to the side of the house containing
the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.

Once in position the lead Wizard begins casting a spell, a successful
spellcraft check reveals it to be a Empowered Fireball he intends to aim
through an arrow slit in an effort to take out the party of the stairs.
Knowing she cannot counterspell the sorceress instead drops a Wall of
Force five foot in front of the Wizards.

I allow each Wizard a DC18 Listen check but they all fail and since WoF is
invisible I determine they are unaware of its existence (any successful
check would have brought the problem into play). The FB detonates
prematurely and either kills or renders unconscious each Wizard.

Now, what would have happened if any of the Wizards made the listen check?
Could the Sorceress have placed the wall as the Wizard completed the FB?
After he aims (at the end of the casting)? Or could the Wizard have
voluntarily aborted or reaimed the spell?

The rules say that the interruption occurs just before the actions that
trigger it but it seems a little tight to me to not allow the Sorceress to
kind of "delay" the completion of her own spell. Thoughts? Similar
experiences? Is this my liberal attitude to the ready action returning to
bite me on the ass?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Symbol wrote:
> While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle isn't
> going as planned and have made their to the side of the house containing
> the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
> upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.

I would rule that this is not specific enough of an "action" for the
purposes of readying. I would want to know *what* she was going
to do if the enemy started casting.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Symbol wrote:
> While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle isn't
> going as planned and have made their to the side of the house containing
> the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
> upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
>
> Once in position the lead Wizard begins casting a spell, a successful
> spellcraft check reveals it to be a Empowered Fireball he intends to aim
> through an arrow slit in an effort to take out the party of the stairs.
> Knowing she cannot counterspell the sorceress instead drops a Wall of
> Force five foot in front of the Wizards.

Nope, this can't be done. You can't ready to "do something", you have
to ready a specific action. If the Sorceress readied to counterspell,
and then found that she was unable to counter the spell that was cast,
then her readied action wuld be lost.

The only way she would have been able to do this is say "I ready to
cast a Wall of Force in front of the guy as soon as he starts to cast a
spell," or even "I ready to cast a Wall of Force in front of the wizard
if he casts an area-attack spell." That would have worked.

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Klassen wrote:
> Symbol wrote:
> > While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle isn't
> > going as planned and have made their to the side of the house containing
> > the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
> > upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
>
> I would rule that this is not specific enough of an "action" for the
> purposes of readying. I would want to know *what* she was going
> to do if the enemy started casting.

I agree, 'I ready to somehow disrupt their spellcasting' is far too
vague for my liking.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

IHateLashknife@hotmail.com wrote:
> David Klassen wrote:
> > Symbol wrote:
> > > While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle isn't
> > > going as planned and have made their to the side of the house containing
> > > the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
> > > upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
> >
> > I would rule that this is not specific enough of an "action" for the
> > purposes of readying. I would want to know *what* she was going
> > to do if the enemy started casting.
>
> I agree, 'I ready to somehow disrupt their spellcasting' is far too
> vague for my liking.

Right. I've found that a good way to explain this to people is to have
them imagine a policeman holding a criminal at gunpoint, telling him to
"freeze, or I'll shoot!"

In that situation, the policeman has a readied action to shoot. That
readied action can trigger in a whole variety of situations: if the
criminal starts to run (in D&D terms, starts moving), if he goes for
his gun (takes a move action to retrieve an item), or whatever.

However, the readied action _itself_ is very specific. The policeman is
poised to shoot. If the robber starts to run, and the policeman wants
to do something other than shoot (like give chase), he can... but not
with his readied action. The "ready to shoot" stance is quite different
from the "ready to give chase" stance.

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
>
> Symbol wrote:
> > While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle isn't
> > going as planned and have made their to the side of the house containing
> > the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
> > upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
> >
> > Once in position the lead Wizard begins casting a spell, a successful
> > spellcraft check reveals it to be a Empowered Fireball he intends to aim
> > through an arrow slit in an effort to take out the party of the stairs.
> > Knowing she cannot counterspell the sorceress instead drops a Wall of
> > Force five foot in front of the Wizards.
>
> Nope, this can't be done. You can't ready to "do something", you have
> to ready a specific action. If the Sorceress readied to counterspell,
> and then found that she was unable to counter the spell that was cast,
> then her readied action wuld be lost.

I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
specific action. However, counterspelling is really
just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
sorceress *should* have specified that she was readying
an action to interrupt spellcasting with a spell of her
own; that spell could then be cast as a counterspell or
(as it turned out) a Wall of Force.

So in this case, no harm, no foul.

-Bluto

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Symbol wrote:
> Something came up that made be think about some of the issues not
> fully explored by the ready action. Exactly how much control does a
> readier have over when their action takes place and exactly what can
> an interrupted character do about it? The issue almost came up during
> our game and an innovative piece of play allowed a party of 12th
> level characters to overcome an ~EL 18 encounter without a single PC
> casualty.
>
> Allow me to explain. First a little background. The PCs are at their
> home base, a fortified large stone house in the middle of a compound
> and are attacked by an organization they've been pissing off for a
> while now. The force against them is composed of 20 bonded undead
> warriors (custom monster, tough fast zombies who can be directly
> controlled CR 7) a 14th level Wizard and his 3 10th level
> subordinates (also Wizards).
>
> The Wizards do not intend to get directly involved in the fight but
> are there to control their bonded warriors and overcome the magical
> alarms on the compound. To cut a long story short and get to the
> relevant bit the PCs manage to successfully "form up" and establish a
> bottle neck at the top
> of a stairway. Despite being unarmoured they gain the upper hand
> during which time the party Sorceress (knowing the nature of the
> bonded warriors) dimension doors to the roof top to see who is
> leading the attack. It is dark and she is unobserved but spots the
> Mage and his assistants below.
>
> While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle
> isn't going as planned and have made their to the side of the house
> containing the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything
> until called upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell
> casting.
>
> Once in position the lead Wizard begins casting a spell, a successful
> spellcraft check reveals it to be a Empowered Fireball he intends to
> aim through an arrow slit in an effort to take out the party of the
> stairs. Knowing she cannot counterspell the sorceress instead drops a
> Wall of Force five foot in front of the Wizards.

Given that "counterspell" is a well-documented Readied action, I'd tend to
rule that any broader set of options which includes "counterspell" can't be
readied - you'd need to be specific. In this particular case, I'd say that
the Sorceress would have to choose either counterspelling or casting a
specific spell as her Readied action.

That aside, I think you were perfectly reasonable. The Wizard must already
be well on his way into the spell in order for the Sorceress to have
anything to observe for her Spellcraft check, and then there's the time it
takes for the Sorceress to complete her spellcasting. I'd say having the
spells complete simultaneously - the Wall of Force popping into existence as
the Fireball leaves the mage's finger - is a reasonable resolution.

I wouldn't bother giving the caster a Listen check. He's concentrating on
his spell, and even if he does hear, he's likely to assume she's
counterspelling in any case.

--
Mark.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Senator Blutarsky wrote:
> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> >
> > Symbol wrote:
> > > While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle isn't
> > > going as planned and have made their to the side of the house containing
> > > the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
> > > upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
> > >
> > > Once in position the lead Wizard begins casting a spell, a successful
> > > spellcraft check reveals it to be a Empowered Fireball he intends to aim
> > > through an arrow slit in an effort to take out the party of the stairs.
> > > Knowing she cannot counterspell the sorceress instead drops a Wall of
> > > Force five foot in front of the Wizards.
> >
> > Nope, this can't be done. You can't ready to "do something", you have
> > to ready a specific action. If the Sorceress readied to counterspell,
> > and then found that she was unable to counter the spell that was cast,
> > then her readied action wuld be lost.
>
> I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
> specific action. However, counterspelling is really
> just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
> sorceress *should* have specified that she was readying
> an action to interrupt spellcasting with a spell of her
> own; that spell could then be cast as a counterspell or
> (as it turned out) a Wall of Force.

I believe you're mistaken, and I can see nothing in the rules or the
FAQ that would support your view. Counterspelling is _not_ a form of
the "cast a spell" action, it's listed as a separate action under Ready
actions (Ready to Counterspell).

The rules say you may counter a spell with an appropriate spell of your
own. It says nothing about being able to cast any other spells. And the
description of the Ready action makes it clear that you must "specify
the action you will take".

There are _plenty_ of game-breaking tricks with the Ready action
already, even if we stick to the RAW. There's really no need to make it
any more powerful.

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
>
> Senator Blutarsky wrote:
> >
> > I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
> > specific action. However, counterspelling is really
> > just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
> > sorceress *should* have specified that she was readying
> > an action to interrupt spellcasting with a spell of her
> > own; that spell could then be cast as a counterspell or
> > (as it turned out) a Wall of Force.
>
> I believe you're mistaken, and I can see nothing in the rules or the
> FAQ that would support your view. Counterspelling is _not_ a form of
> the "cast a spell" action,

"To complete the [counterspelling] action, you must
then cast the correct spell." (PHB, p.170.) I don't
know how else you would accomplish that.

> it's listed as a separate action under Ready
> actions (Ready to Counterspell).

That doesn't mean the authors intended for it to be
treated as separate and distinct from the general rules
(and nowhere does it mention this being a separate
"action"), just that it's a complicated enough maneuver
that most people are going to need the procedure neatly
summarized for them.

Look, the simple question is: if you have enough time
to figure out what the appropriate counterspell is and
cast it, why wouldn't you be able to choose and cast
any *other* 1-action spell in that amount of time?

> The rules say you may counter a spell with an appropriate spell of your
> own. It says nothing about being able to cast any other spells.

Well, of course you can't *counter* a spell with just
"any other" spell! We're not talking about that.
We're talking about readying a "Cast a Spell" action,
and using that spell to interrupt someone else's
spell--either by counterspelling it, or simply by
getting your own off first.

> And the
> description of the Ready action makes it clear that you must "specify
> the action you will take".

Yes. CAST A SPELL is an action.

> There are _plenty_ of game-breaking tricks with the Ready action
> already, even if we stick to the RAW. There's really no need to make it
> any more powerful.

I don't think this is going to break anyone's game, and
I believe it *is* the RAW.

-Bluto

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Symbol wrote:
> Everything I've read on counterspelling either states or implies
> that is a variant form of casting the spell normally. Only the effect is
> different.

It's an interesting theory but I don't believe that's what the
designers had in mind. There's no conclusive proof that I can find,
it's just the way they describe things. For example, under
Counterspells in the SRD: Magic Overview

"To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of
the counterspell. You do this by choosing the ready action. In doing
so, you elect to wait to complete your action until your opponent tries
to cast a spell."

Makes it sound like it's very specific and in no way just an extension
of readying to cast a spell. Also, it says you have to choose a target
for the counterspell - but as there was no counterspell in this case
then how could there have been a target?

Note also that, in your example, there seems to be no selecting of a
single opponent as the target - the sorceress just seems to be
targetting every opponent she can see. But maybe she realised somehow
that one of them was the 'boss mage' and decided to concentrate on
them?

A little later on:
"To complete the action, you must then cast the correct spell."

Makes it sound like Counterspell is the action, and not cast a spell.
it also used this 'complete your action' wording above as well - it
seems to suggest that you get ready to counterspell and that the reason
it works is that you just have to finish the last bit off.

As I say, none of this is 100% conclusive, but it does seem to be how
the designers envisioned it working IMO.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Senator Blutarsky wrote:
> I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
> specific action. However, counterspelling is really
> just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The

And, as DM, my question would have been "What spell?"

I'd allow *some* leeway for counterspelling since you can't
predetermine that. But what you are doing is watching to
figure out the nature of the spell and reacting either with
the same spell or dispel magic (and I would have the player
not which, allowing a fallback to dispel if the former was
the choice).

The point is that ready is not supposed to require lots of
complex thought at the time of the interruption.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"David Klassen" <klassen@rowan.edu> wrote in message
news:1118334343.173196.155500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Symbol wrote:
> > While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle
isn't
> > going as planned and have made their to the side of the house
containing
> > the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until
called
> > upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
>
> I would rule that this is not specific enough of an "action" for the
> purposes of readying. I would want to know *what* she was going
> to do if the enemy started casting.

Specifically she was preparing a spell casting action. Sorry if I didn't
make that clear enough.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
news:1118334842.808234.205870@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Symbol wrote:
> > While this is going on the controlling Wizards realize the battle
isn't
> > going as planned and have made their to the side of the house
containing
> > the staircase. The Sorceress determines not to do anything until
called
> > upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
> >
> > Once in position the lead Wizard begins casting a spell, a successful
> > spellcraft check reveals it to be a Empowered Fireball he intends to
aim
> > through an arrow slit in an effort to take out the party of the
stairs.
> > Knowing she cannot counterspell the sorceress instead drops a Wall of
> > Force five foot in front of the Wizards.
>
> Nope, this can't be done. You can't ready to "do something", you have
> to ready a specific action. If the Sorceress readied to counterspell,
> and then found that she was unable to counter the spell that was cast,
> then her readied action wuld be lost.

I don't agree with your interpretation but I'll come to that later as SB
has already started.

> The only way she would have been able to do this is say "I ready to
> cast a Wall of Force in front of the guy as soon as he starts to cast a
> spell," or even "I ready to cast a Wall of Force in front of the wizard
> if he casts an area-attack spell." That would have worked.

That specificity goes *well* beyond what the rules require. But let's
assume for the sake of argument that this *is* what was said. What options
would the interupter and interuptee have with regard to the timing of the
wall placement or reaiming etc?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Senator Blutarsky" <monarchy@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42A92255.A5FFB846@comcast.net...
> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> >
> > Senator Blutarsky wrote:
> > >
> > > I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
> > > specific action.

Note that casting a spell was the prepared action in this case. I just
didn't explain it very well as I was more interested in the
timing/completion/reaiming issues.

> > > However, counterspelling is really
> > > just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
> > > sorceress *should* have specified that she was readying
> > > an action to interrupt spellcasting with a spell of her
> > > own; that spell could then be cast as a counterspell or
> > > (as it turned out) a Wall of Force.
> >
> > I believe you're mistaken, and I can see nothing in the rules or the
> > FAQ that would support your view. Counterspelling is _not_ a form of
> > the "cast a spell" action,
>
> "To complete the [counterspelling] action, you must
> then cast the correct spell." (PHB, p.170.) I don't
> know how else you would accomplish that.

Nor I. Everything I've read on counterspelling either states or implies
that is a variant form of casting the spell normally. Only the effect is
different.

> > it's listed as a separate action under Ready
> > actions (Ready to Counterspell).
>
> That doesn't mean the authors intended for it to be
> treated as separate and distinct from the general rules
> (and nowhere does it mention this being a separate
> "action"), just that it's a complicated enough maneuver
> that most people are going to need the procedure neatly
> summarized for them.

Right.

> Look, the simple question is: if you have enough time
> to figure out what the appropriate counterspell is and
> cast it, why wouldn't you be able to choose and cast
> any *other* 1-action spell in that amount of time?

Exactly.

> > The rules say you may counter a spell with an appropriate spell of
your
> > own. It says nothing about being able to cast any other spells.
>
> Well, of course you can't *counter* a spell with just
> "any other" spell! We're not talking about that.
> We're talking about readying a "Cast a Spell" action,
> and using that spell to interrupt someone else's
> spell--either by counterspelling it, or simply by
> getting your own off first.

Also remember the Improved Counterspell feat which allows you to
subsititute a whole host of other spells in a counter attempt. You get to
choose which one of those you'd use so it isn't like being forced into a
specific choice somehow speeds things up.

> > And the
> > description of the Ready action makes it clear that you must "specify
> > the action you will take".
>
> Yes. CAST A SPELL is an action.
>
> > There are _plenty_ of game-breaking tricks with the Ready action
> > already, even if we stick to the RAW. There's really no need to make
it
> > any more powerful.
>
> I don't think this is going to break anyone's game, and
> I believe it *is* the RAW.

I don't even thing Ready is that powerful given that it restricts you from
making Full Round Actions. Using Lazlo's strict criteria is hardly seems
worth bothering with.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Mark Blunden" <m.blundenATntlworld.com@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:3graa2FdreqoU1@individual.net...
> Symbol wrote:

> Given that "counterspell" is a well-documented Readied action, I'd tend
to
> rule that any broader set of options which includes "counterspell" can't
be
> readied - you'd need to be specific.

"Cast a Spell" includes counterspelling attempts. Counterspelling isn't an
action. The spellcraft skill makes it clear that identifying the spell is
free and then you simply cast an appropriate spell at the right time. As
SB says it has its own section because it requires a more complete
explaination but various sources confirm that you are basically casting a
spell.

> That aside, I think you were perfectly reasonable. The Wizard must
already
> be well on his way into the spell in order for the Sorceress to have
> anything to observe for her Spellcraft check, and then there's the time
it
> takes for the Sorceress to complete her spellcasting. I'd say having the
> spells complete simultaneously - the Wall of Force popping into
existence as
> the Fireball leaves the mage's finger - is a reasonable resolution.

Ok cool. I thought it seemed reasonable at the time and thinking about it
hasn't changed my mind. It also struck me as a damn fine idea which
inclines me to be more lenient anyway.

> I wouldn't bother giving the caster a Listen check. He's concentrating
on
> his spell, and even if he does hear, he's likely to assume she's
> counterspelling in any case.

Well he wasn't aware of the sorceress' presence and neither were his
minions (who at that point were just standing around and could have made
themselves more useful).

 

[Spinner]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

>> I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
>> specific action. However, counterspelling is really
>> just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
>
> And, as DM, my question would have been "What spell?"
>
Why?

> I'd allow *some* leeway for counterspelling since you can't
> predetermine that. But what you are doing is watching to
> figure out the nature of the spell and reacting either with
> the same spell or dispel magic (and I would have the player
> not which, allowing a fallback to dispel if the former was
> the choice).
>
Which'd be a lot trickier and more complex than firing off another handy
spell that needn't match your target's.

> The point is that ready is not supposed to require lots of
> complex thought at the time of the interruption.
>
But counterspelling does.

Spinner

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<IHateLashknife@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1118398866.708036.211720@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Symbol wrote:
> > Everything I've read on counterspelling either states or implies
> > that is a variant form of casting the spell normally. Only the effect
is
> > different.
>
> It's an interesting theory but I don't believe that's what the
> designers had in mind. There's no conclusive proof that I can find,
> it's just the way they describe things. For example, under
> Counterspells in the SRD: Magic Overview
>
> "To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of
> the counterspell. You do this by choosing the ready action. In doing
> so, you elect to wait to complete your action until your opponent tries
> to cast a spell."
>
> Makes it sound like it's very specific and in no way just an extension
> of readying to cast a spell.

That isn't the way I read the section. It is simply informing you of
something you can do and how you do it.

> Also, it says you have to choose a target
> for the counterspell - but as there was no counterspell in this case
> then how could there have been a target?

Or does it mean that you cannot counterspell unless there is a valid
target or is it establishing the fact that you must be in range of the
actual caster (rather than their spell) in order to counter it? You're
talking about an introductory section here. An introduction to the concept
of counterspelling.

> Note also that, in your example, there seems to be no selecting of a
> single opponent as the target - the sorceress just seems to be
> targetting every opponent she can see. But maybe she realised somehow
> that one of them was the 'boss mage' and decided to concentrate on
> them?

No, just waiting for spell casting. As I said in the opening post I have a
very liberal view towards Readying, I don't think it is meant to be too
specific.

> A little later on:
> "To complete the action, you must then cast the correct spell."

This would be more convincing if it wasn't just repeating rules from other
sections and combining them into a complete explanation. (Ready ->
Spellcraft -> Cast the spell.)

> Makes it sound like Counterspell is the action, and not cast a spell.
> it also used this 'complete your action' wording above as well - it
> seems to suggest that you get ready to counterspell and that the reason
> it works is that you just have to finish the last bit off.
>
> As I say, none of this is 100% conclusive, but it does seem to be how
> the designers envisioned it working IMO.

On the other hand a lot of the regular spell casting rules still apply to
counterspelling and the designers don't bother to point this out so it is
possible that they consider it as nothing more than an extension of normal
spell casting. It also doesn't have a separate entry on the action table
(unlike concentrating on or dismissing a spell) and it isn't discussed in
the corresponding text either.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Symbol wrote:
> "Mark Blunden" <m.blundenATntlworld.com@address.invalid> wrote in
> message news:3graa2FdreqoU1@individual.net...
>> Symbol wrote:
>
>> Given that "counterspell" is a well-documented Readied action, I'd
>> tend to rule that any broader set of options which includes
>> "counterspell" can't be readied - you'd need to be specific.
>
> "Cast a Spell" includes counterspelling attempts. Counterspelling
> isn't an action. The spellcraft skill makes it clear that identifying
> the spell is free and then you simply cast an appropriate spell at
> the right time. As SB says it has its own section because it requires
> a more complete explaination but various sources confirm that you are
> basically casting a spell.

"Cast a spell" is specifically too broad an action - see DMG page 25: "If a
character readies an action to cast a spell when a foe comes at her, the
player needs to specify the exact spell - and you're justified in making the
player identify a specific foe". I don't see any reason why readying to cast
a spell when a foe begins spellcasting would be any different to that
example.

Counterspelling is a specific exception to this rule, in that you can choose
which spell to use based on the spell the enemy is casting - but that *only*
applies if you then cast either the appropriate countering spell or dispel
magic, and cast it in the form of a counterspell.

--
Mark.

 

[Spinner]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

> "Cast a spell" is specifically too broad an action - see DMG page 25: "If
> a
> character readies an action to cast a spell when a foe comes at her, the
> player needs to specify the exact spell - and you're justified in making
> the
> player identify a specific foe". I don't see any reason why readying to
> cast
> a spell when a foe begins spellcasting would be any different to that
> example.
>
I was hoping 3.5 hadn't put anything in to get that stingy on readied
spells. Too bad. Myself I'd go so far as to house rule it away ... if for
nothing else, to make spell interruption viable again.

Spinner

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:40:11 +0100, "Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> wrote:

>The Sorceress determines not to do anything until called
>upon and maintains a readied action to interrupt spell casting.
>
>Once in position the lead Wizard begins casting a spell, a successful
>spellcraft check reveals it to be a Empowered Fireball he intends to aim
>through an arrow slit in an effort to take out the party of the stairs.
>Knowing she cannot counterspell the sorceress instead drops a Wall of
>Force five foot in front of the Wizards.

I wouldn't permit this. It requires too much of a decision on her
part.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 17:49:43 -0700, Senator Blutarsky
<monarchy@comcast.net> wrote:

>I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
>specific action. However, counterspelling is really
>just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
>sorceress *should* have specified that she was readying
>an action to interrupt spellcasting with a spell of her
>own; that spell could then be cast as a counterspell or
>(as it turned out) a Wall of Force.

I still wouldn't accept this. She had to decide a tactic and that
doesn't fit within the realm of a readied action in my interpretation.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

One of the voices in my head - or was it Spinner? - just said...
> > "Cast a spell" is specifically too broad an action - see DMG page 25: "If
> > a
> > character readies an action to cast a spell when a foe comes at her, the
> > player needs to specify the exact spell - and you're justified in making
> > the
> > player identify a specific foe". I don't see any reason why readying to
> > cast
> > a spell when a foe begins spellcasting would be any different to that
> > example.
> >
> I was hoping 3.5 hadn't put anything in to get that stingy on readied
> spells. Too bad. Myself I'd go so far as to house rule it away ... if for
> nothing else, to make spell interruption viable again.


"3.5 changed that!!!" Ah, the rallying cry of everyone who's been
getting the rules wrong all along.

Read page 63 of your 3.0 DMG, please.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Klassen wrote:
>
> Senator Blutarsky wrote:
> > I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
> > specific action. However, counterspelling is really
> > just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
>
> And, as DM, my question would have been "What spell?"

Do you require fighters readying an Attack Action to
specify whether they will be using their longsword or
their dagger? Disarming or Sundering? Fighting
defensively or normally?

I mean, I just want to know how consistent you are in
applying your house rule.

-Bluto

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Heikkinen wrote:
> One of the voices in my head - or was it Spinner? - just said...
> >
> > I have to agree with Symbol and with the Senator. There is some fuziness
> > but the weight seems to tip slightly in favour of allowing a ready to cast a
> > spell (which may or may not be a counterspell).
>
> No, absolutely not. DMG, page 63 or 25 depending on the edition. It ends
> the discussion. This is not a grey area.

Thank you! I wasn't aware of that rule, and I'm definitely relieved.

This rule _does_ screw over counterspelling, which is a pity. Since it
shuts the door on egregious rule abuses, though, it's for the greater
good.

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

One of the voices in my head - or was it Senator Blutarsky? - just
said...
> David Klassen wrote:
> >
> > Senator Blutarsky wrote:
> > > I disagree (slightly). It's true that you must ready a
> > > specific action. However, counterspelling is really
> > > just a form of the "Cast a Spell" action. The
> >
> > And, as DM, my question would have been "What spell?"
>
> Do you require fighters readying an Attack Action to
> specify whether they will be using their longsword or
> their dagger? Disarming or Sundering? Fighting
> defensively or normally?
>
> I mean, I just want to know how consistent you are in
> applying your house rule.

What house rule? Read page 63 or 25 of your DMG, depending which
edition.

Moreover - and this isn't in response to anything specific about this
post, it's a general comment to two or three people, but since you're
one of them I may as well put it here - the rules say "You may ready an
action to counter a spell", not "If you ready an action to cast a spell,
you may choose to use a counterspell when your action triggers", or any
other such wording. That seems pretty cut and dried to me -
counterspelling is something you have to specify ahead of time when you
declare a Ready.