|
Post by Kelly on Jul 20, 2004 18:21:30 GMT -5
Wow. It is so complicated. No wonder I never counter spell expect for dispell magic. LOL. But definitely good information for the future. I hope I never have to use it. Hahahaha
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jul 21, 2004 9:07:16 GMT -5
From the 3.5 SRD
I see nothing regarding range in there. I only need to ready an action to use dispel magic as a counterspell. Granted, against a touch spell, I would argue that you would have to be touched in order to counterspell since the spell doesn't go off until you are touched. Fireball, on the other hand, goes off at range and thus can be counterspelled pretty much at any time. Rereading my 3.5 PHB, page 170 I also see that there is nothing about range.
The only requirement is that I see the caster. Not all that difficult considering various magic to enhance sight, or a spyglass. You were about 500 feet away when he counterspelled. Considering your own scout has a +umpteen spot check, it's not out of the realm of possibility that your enemy might be smart enough to invest in goggles of far seeing and the like. Thus no checks for scrying and such. Heh.
Dude, you just got pwned. I love rules lawyering and I'm very, very good at it.
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Jul 21, 2004 10:53:07 GMT -5
I am not arguing with anyone because I do not really care. But I would just like to point out the obvious. Range is clearly stated in the quotes cited by the DM above.
"If the target is within range, both spells automatically negate each other with no other results."
Target is defined as the recipient of the spell by the Player's Handbook. The target in counterspelling is the mage who is trying to cast the spell which is to be counterspelled, not the spell force coming at the subject of the spell. So clearly the opposing mage must be within range of the counterspell cast by the counterspeller, or it cannot generally work.
The fact that the opposing spellcaster is the target is made clear by the 3.5 SRD. "You are using the spell's energy to disrupt the casting of the same spell by another caster." To disrupt the casting, the counterspell must target the caster and the caster must be within range of the counterspeller. You are not disrupting the spell force itself; you are disrupting the caster while he/she is casting the original spell.
This is further confirmed in the next paragraph. "To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of the counterspell." Thus, it is clear that the opposing mage is the opponent and he/she must be targeted within the stated range of the counterspell, or it just won't work. The counterspell's target is the opponent, not a spell force. This logic is repeatedly reconfirmed by the balance of the description of counterspelling.
"Wands use the spell trigger activation method...." "To activate a wand, a character must hold it in its hand...and point it in the general direction of the target or area." "No gestures or spell or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken."
Based on the foregoing paragraph, it is clear that no somatic motions or gestures are being made by a spellcaster who is using a wand. Therefore, there are no motions or gestures that could be observed during an opposing spellcaster's spellcraft check. Thus, the only possible way to generally counterspell a wand is to either know for sure what spell the wand will cast, or to hear the command word spoken and to know for sure what spell that command word will activate.
This clear rule is further reinforced by the description in the spellcraft table whereby you can attempt to identify a spell being cast. To attempt to identify a spell being cast, it says "You must see or hear the spell's verbal or somatic components."
In the case of a wand, there are no somatic components. So in our situation, the only possible way to even attempt to counter the spell from the wand of extended fireballs would be (1) for the opposing caster to be within range of the original caster, (2) for the opposing caster to clearly hear the command word being spoken (over the sounds of combat and at a distance of 500 feet), and (3) for the opposing caster to know for sure what spell that command word would in fact trigger. While possible, it is highly unlikely that this could occur.
If the opposing spellcaster was using dispel magic as a counterspell, the counterspelling spellcaster still must be within range of the wizard who is to be counterspelled. The description of Dispel Magic clearly says that the target of that spell when it is being used to counterspell is the opposing spellcaster. So once again, to use dispel magic as a counterspell device the counterspelling wizard must be within range of the original caster. The target is not the spell force; the target is the opposing caster.
It cannot even be argued that the effect of the fireball was dispelled on its way to or on board the enemy ship. The dispel magic spell description says "The effect of a spell with an instaneous duration can't be dispelled, because the magical effect is already over before the dispel magic can take effect." Fireball is a spell with an instaneous duration, and therefore the effect cannot be dispelled.
Thus, the dispel magic spell cannot be used as a counterspelling mechanism at a range of 500' unless the counterspeller's caster level is at the highest levels of an epic character. Further, the dispel magic spell cannot be used to dispel the effect of a fireball. So dispel magic simply would not work in this case unless we were facing a 40th level wizard or higher.
|
|
|
Post by CosmicHorror on Jul 21, 2004 17:36:26 GMT -5
Even I wasn't going to go into that much detail! Thanks for backing me up anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jul 21, 2004 22:04:04 GMT -5
Turj, if you read this, a phone call blocked my connection. I saw you come back in, but I'm not sure if you could ssee others. Try again.
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jul 22, 2004 1:18:19 GMT -5
First off, appologies for disappearing like that. I'm really sorry. The baby went ballistic and has been grumpy all day. The weather is bad here, so that usually sets her off. Thanks for understanding.
Secondly, Turj, sorry about the mix up. We saw you come back into the game, but apparently there was some sort of lag demon or something like that, so you couldn't see our posts. In the future, if there are any malfunctions like that, check here and on Yahoo IM to see what's going on.
Thirdly, more appoligies. I wasn't entirely prepped for the fight today, so that's why it went a bit slowly. I forgot a couple of things when I was prepping on the weekend and so I wasn't entirely ready. That being said, it will always take a while for me to do my turn. You guys only have to control 1 character. In this fight alone, I had 62 opponents to deal with. It is going to take me a while to get through that. But, when it comes time for your turns, please be ready. I've already talked about this before with the shot clock thing, and I will adhere to that as much as possible.
Hopefully in the future I'll be a little better prepped with macros so that we can run through combat quicker. heh. The higher level you guys get, the slower combat is going to be, mostly because there are going to be so many things going on in a single combat.
It is also a good idea to familiarize yourself with the grapple rules. It WILL come up again. Guaranteed. There are far too many critters out there with improved grab, and, considering that many of you have AC's in the 20's, most critters can't hit you any other way. So, opposed grapple checks work like this:
Base Attack Bonus (which is the high number if it's your first attack or -5 for each attack thereafter) + Strength bonus + size modifier (which is zero for you guys) + any other mods like bard song or whatever.
Thus, for most characters, their first grapple check will be BAB+STR Mod, while any iterative checks will be BAB-5+STR Mod. Hope that clears things up.
One final idea. It would be a really good idea for people to start sticking some html tags into their attack rolls and other actions. Remember, in Open, tags use the triangle brackets <> . Good ones to remember (for those of us who are complete luddites:
br - line break. b /b - bold font color=x /font - changing text color
Those three really make life a lot easier to read. Remember the triangle brackets.
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jul 22, 2004 1:20:00 GMT -5
Crap, forgot something. While I freely admit my mistake with the dispel magic, I realize now that it could have been a Heightened Dispel Magic at 10th level. That would cover 400 feet, or 4 hexes. Which was about the range that you cast your fireball. I'm not sure, but we'll say that's what happened. Any ideas as to how to make dispel magic go farther?
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jul 22, 2004 1:26:03 GMT -5
Heh, just checked something. Do you realize your fireball wand has a range of 1360 feet?
It's a 7th level wand, thus giving you 1360 feet. Oops.
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Jul 22, 2004 11:52:40 GMT -5
Don't worry about it. I thought combat went fairly smoothly given the vast number of creatures you were having to run. Also I used the Wall of Fire Spell, which is rare to see used and which, by the way, I also had not used before. Everything seemed cool to me (other than being sucked into the ooze - LOL).
Fortunately, I managed to knock out about 1/3 of the creatures attacking us in my first two attacks. That should help reduce your DM workload in the next session. Heck would be nice if I could knock out a ton more of them (especially the ones ready to attack me again - HaHa).
Anyway, it was a good session. Keep up the great work. I had fun even though I was almost ooze chow.
|
|
|
Post by SleepingDragon on Jul 22, 2004 12:53:59 GMT -5
Working on a new macro for Palai now, so you won't have to worry about giant blocks of text in the future (at least not from me).
And don't worry about the combat going slowly, it doesn't. If you want to see combat going at a snail's pace, you need to show up to watch one of my sessions, heh.
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jul 22, 2004 20:13:57 GMT -5
Really? I was really worried that you guys were all bored out of your skulls. Thanks for the words of encouragement.
I'm realizing, as you guys go up levels, that combat is just going to get more and more complicated. Heh.
See, I kinda assumed that you would have brought troopies with you. I figured on having a bit of mass combat going and whittle down the number of shares you guys have to give out on treasure. Heh. Oh well, never assume anything.
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Jul 24, 2004 15:12:19 GMT -5
Well we did bring two marines with us. The funny thing is that I am pretty sure we forgot to use them. I think they are just standing around. Of course, the joke was that they were the cannon fodder. LOL.
|
|
|
Post by Merkuri on Jul 24, 2004 17:42:32 GMT -5
I said something along the lines of "Hey, where are our two marines?" and I think Hussar said something like "I thought you were kidding, so no marines."
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Jul 24, 2004 18:54:58 GMT -5
Oh
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jul 24, 2004 19:28:23 GMT -5
I really did think you were kidding. Sorry, my bad. I'll bring the marines back from their scouting after the fight. How's that?
|
|