So a few of of my friends are arguing over how the new "Convergent Future" ability from Chronomancy works. The rules stat: When you or a creature you can see within 60 feet of you makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw, you can use your reaction to ignore the die roll and decide whether the number rolled is the minimum needed to succeed or one less than that number (your choice). I say that means, that if you need a 15, and you have a +3 prof bonus; then you choose 12 or 11. One of thinks you ignore all bonuses and take the straight number you need. Even if that number can not be rolled on a d20 (say you need 21 to barely pass). And the DM thinks it is the number you need before adding in bonuses, then once that number is chosen, then you add in your bonus. Making the ability pointless in terms of preventing someone from passing a save. Which I view is wrong and making over all ability near fully pointless. So I come out to the community to see what others think, and what the finally ruling of the power is.
RAI, it must be that "minimum needed to succeed or one less than that number (your choice)" is referring to the number on the dice needed to succeed (you are ignoring the dice roll). It does not say that you treat the roll as equal to (or one less than) the AC or DC. I'm not sure that the wording on this ability is air tight, but it seems pretty obvious that RAI you can choose to make the roll into a success or failure, your choice.
DM: The gnoll swings his spear at you. I rolled a 16 Player: My AC is 16 that hits. DM: Ha! Player: Shucks! Player: Wait! I use convergent future to make that 16 a 15 instead! Player: Ha! DM: Shucks! DM: Wait! But the gnoll has a +2 bonus to hit, raising that 15 to a 17! It hits you anyway! DM: Ha! Player: Shucks! Player: Wait! I cast shield, so now my AC is 21! The 17 misses! Player: Ha! DM: Shucks! DM: Wait! You already used your reaction, so you can’t cast shield! The 17 hits! DM: Ha! Player: Shucks!
By "minimum needed to succeed" is irrelevant whether it means adding bonuses or not. It's literally the minimum needed to succeed so it succeeds. 1 less than that by definition is a failure.
Say the DC is 15 and your bonuses are +5. The minimum needed to succeed if you include bonuses is 10 and the minimum without is 15. It makes no difference. You still attained the minimum needed to succeed so you succeeded.
You can't roll a 21 on a 20-sided die so that can't happen.
If you go strictly RAW, "the number rolled is the minimum needed to succeed or one less than that number" would mean before you add bonuses. If your AC is 16 and I have a +5 bonus from my ability score and proficiency bonus then the "minimum needed" is 11.
2. It specifies the die roll. So if a check or a save were to require a roll of 21+ on a d20, it cannot succeed. Bonuses/penalties are applied to the result, but it makes no difference if static bonuses are applied before or after the roll is made to the check, attack, etc for practical purposes. If you have a +5 to save, does it matter if you add five to your roll or subtract five from the Save DC? If one has a bonus of +2 then a DC of 25 cannot succeed ever, likewise if one has a bonus of +6 then a DC of 5 cannot fail ever.
3. Attacks are different though, since a natural 20 always hits and a natural 1 always misses. Since you are changing the actual result of the die rolled, then if one had a +2 to hit and was trying to hit an AC of 35, then the roll becomes a natural 20, not only a hit, but a critical. Likewise, if one got hit by a +30 to attack roll with an AC of 10, the die would be changed to a 1 and thus miss.
Your DM can houserule whatever he wants, but his interpretation is not correct. If your AC is 15 and I have a +3 to hit, 12 is the minimum number I need to roll to succeed. It says you're choosing the minimum number rolled that you need to succeed. If that "rolled" wasn't in there he would have ground to stand on, but the way it is stated is that it takes into account your bonuses and ultimately you're deciding if the action succeeds or fails by changing the roll.
2. It specifies the die roll. So if a check or a save were to require a roll of 21+ on a d20, it cannot succeed. Bonuses/penalties are applied to the result, but it makes no difference if static bonuses are applied before or after the roll is made to the check, attack, etc for practical purposes. If you have a +5 to save, does it matter if you add five to your roll or subtract five from the Save DC? If one has a bonus of +2 then a DC of 25 cannot succeed ever, likewise if one has a bonus of +6 then a DC of 5 cannot fail ever.
3. Attacks are different though, since a natural 20 always hits and a natural 1 always misses. Since you are changing the actual result of the die rolled, then if one had a +2 to hit and was trying to hit an AC of 35, then the roll becomes a natural 20, not only a hit, but a critical. Likewise, if one got hit by a +30 to attack roll with an AC of 10, the die would be changed to a 1 and thus miss.
I think this is the best explanation I've seen yet, I was wondering these myself but you really cleared it up, thank you.
My understanding is that it sets the attack/spell/ECT to either succeed by one or fail by one(I read it to say the to hit Target is what was rolled after bonuses or 1 less) then in reaction the target could still use an ability to change the outcome.
Fighter attacks: does a 7 hit?
DM: nope that misses the necromancer
Chronomancer: actually with my reaction it does now
Dm: the necromancer casts shield in reaction to your hit causing it to miss.
Or
DM: well I used my reaction earlier so now that's a hit
1) Do other effects come before or after? (Presumably someone casting the shield spell comes after the use of this ability). Similarly, all possible known modifiers are applied with the most favorable values before determining what the die roll must have been for success or failure.
A fighter attacks and hits a wizard. The wizard casts shield. The other wizard on the fighters side uses this ability to turn the hit into a miss even with shield?
If the AC became say 26 and this could not be naturally rolled by the fighter does this mean the die roll becomes a 20 because 20's always hit? Thus turning the miss into a critical?
2) Can the ability be used to specify a number that can't be rolled? For example a DC25 ability check with only a +3 modifier would need a 22 to succeed. What if the character had guidance cast on them. Does the ability assume the maximum or minimum number possible for all modifiers? In this case, with guidance, a 20 could be a success if one assumed at least a 2 from the guidance die.
The way the fluff is written, the ability sounds like the caster chooses from a number of possible futures where the event is either a success or a failure. In such a case, modifiers should be as high or low as needed to ensure the desired outcome. For an impossible case, presumably there is no future where the event is resolved as desired.
Its an interesting ability and the intent seems to be to attempt to guarantee either success or failure assuming either is within the range of the possible die rolls so any pre-existing modifiers only matter in terms of whether the die roll is possible or not and any randomly determined pre-existing modifiers should be assigned their most favorable values (e.g. bless, resistance, guidance, bane etc depending on the type of roll).
On the other hand, how does this interact with shield or counterspell. If the ability is used to ensure a hit and the target casts shield does it prevent his ability from ensuring the hit?
My understanding is that it sets the attack/spell/ECT to either succeed by one or fail by one(I read it to say the to hit Target is what was rolled after bonuses or 1 less) then in reaction the target could still use an ability to change the outcome.
Fighter attacks: does a 7 hit?
DM: nope that misses the necromancer
Chronomancer: actually with my reaction it does now
Dm: the necromancer casts shield in reaction to your hit causing it to miss.
Or
DM: well I used my reaction earlier so now that's a hit
On the other hand, how does this interact with shield or counterspell. If the ability is used to ensure a hit and the target casts shield does it prevent his ability from ensuring the hit?
I think that is specifically why it's worded so oddly. It allows your hit/miss to be counteracted by a new buff/debuffs after you use the ability.
On the other hand, how does this interact with shield or counterspell. If the ability is used to ensure a hit and the target casts shield does it prevent his ability from ensuring the hit?
I think that is specifically why it's worded so oddly. It allows your hit/miss to be counteracted by a new buff/debuffs after you use the ability.
1) Do other effects come before or after? (Presumably someone casting the shield spell comes after the use of this ability). Similarly, all possible known modifiers are applied with the most favorable values before determining what the die roll must have been for success or failure. It depends of if they are already in effect or not. The way I imagined it is: Roleplay wise (A fighter goes to hit an enemy spellcaster but final step was too shallow and the spellcaster thinks maybe he can dodge it leading to the fighter missing the hit. You see his final step and think the same thing the spellcaster does and uses your mastery over time to peer into the vast timelines and pull one in which he stepped closer and pulls those events into your reality. Now the fighter is magically placed closer to the spellcaster and he no longer thinks he can dodge so he decides to panic cast shield still causing the hit to miss.) IRL (the fighter rolled low and you used your ability and in response to the shift the spellcaster used shield).
A fighter attacks and hits a wizard. The wizard casts shield. The other wizard on the fighters side uses this ability to turn the hit into a miss even with shield? - Yes
If the AC became say 26 and this could not be naturally rolled by the fighter does this mean the die roll becomes a 20 because 20's always hit? Thus turning the miss into a critical? - I believe this is the case regarding attacks since a 20 is an auto hit and cannot happen otherwise. However with saves/checks its possible for you to still fail even when using this since you cant crit succeed/fail with those unless your DM allows crits on saves/checks.
2) Can the ability be used to specify a number that can't be rolled? For example a DC25 ability check with only a +3 modifier would need a 22 to succeed. What if the character had guidance cast on them. Does the ability assume the maximum or minimum number possible for all modifiers? In this case, with guidance, a 20 could be a success if one assumed at least a 2 from the guidance die. - Because the skill says "ignore the die roll and decide whether the number rolled is the minimum needed to succeed or one less" it has to be a number that can be rolled. With guidance I would assume that the person you cast it on has to decide if they use their guidance or not since it gets added to the "roll" you determine. I think they way the ability is worded they wanted to make a powerful skill for a time manipulator that wasn't impossible to balance. A true auto succeed or fail would be too powerful as you can just choose to have even the most powerful of creatures fail saving throws to spells that auto end the fight.
The way the fluff is written, the ability sounds like the caster chooses from a number of possible futures where the event is either a success or a failure. In such a case, modifiers should be as high or low as needed to ensure the desired outcome. For an impossible case, presumably there is no future where the event is resolved as desired. - Yes
Its an interesting ability and the intent seems to be to attempt to guarantee either success or failure assuming either is within the range of the possible die rolls so any pre-existing modifiers only matter in terms of whether the die roll is possible or not and any randomly determined pre-existing modifiers should be assigned their most favorable values (e.g. bless, resistance, guidance, bane etc depending on the type of roll).
On the other hand, how does this interact with shield or counterspell. If the ability is used to ensure a hit and the target casts shield does it prevent his ability from ensuring the hit? - Anything with a reaction cast time can effectively still change the outcome but counterspell states that you have to see them casting and it has to be a spell, and since this is an ability its most likely useless.
Any thoughts on how this ability interacts with advantage and disadvantage? Do advantage and disadvantage resolve first and then the die is replaced? Or does the creature still get to roll a second die and see if its higher (in the case of advantage) or lower (in the case of disadvantage)?
Any thoughts on how this ability interacts with advantage and disadvantage? Do advantage and disadvantage resolve first and then the die is replaced? Or does the creature still get to roll a second die and see if its higher (in the case of advantage) or lower (in the case of disadvantage)?
You get to choose which the effect applies to. From the rules on advantage and disadvantage:
When you have advantage or disadvantage and something in the game, such as the halfling's Lucky trait, lets you reroll or replace the d20, you can reroll or replace only one of the dice. You choose which one.
So, you can make one but not both of the die fail or pass. This means that you really want to use this on rolls that are not made with advantage or disadvantage. I'm not sure if you actually get to see the results of the rolls before you take your reaction; but if your group lets you know the rolls, you might be able to still use the ability. "Bah, I rolled a 19 and a 5 with disadvantage on this very important save."... "I use my reaction to make that 5 pass."
Were I DM in this situation, I would rule as follows:
convergent future makes the hit, ability check, or save succeed or fail. "...ensuring a particular outcome..." "...ignore the die roll..."
If the roll required is outside 1-20 it doesn't matter. The table of ability checks goes from Very Easy to Nearly Impossible. You can't do the impossible, only the nearly impossible. This doesn't let a dwarf in plate armor fly by flapping his arms really fast. That is impossible. No die roll. Just "You cannot do that." I hate saying those words as a DM but sometimes I have to. This world has physics(and magic). Also, I would expect the wording of the feature to specify "...whether the number rolled(within the 1-20 range of a d20) is the minimum..." if this 'capstone' wizard ability has such a limitation.
Counterspell is not triggered because this isn't casting a spell, as was noted in a previous post.
shield does not prevent a hit. I know this isn't MTG but I apply it's 'stack' model in this way. Attack misses. Chronomancer changes that attack to a hit with convergent future. Hit now meets conditions for shield casting. Target casts shield. Now resolve events in stack order. Shield is cast, changing AC required for hit. Convergent future makes attack a hit. Attack is a hit, roll damage. I know this isn't MTG, and the stack isn't even used in MTg anymore?(idk I stopped playing long ago). But another justification for this ruling is that Convergent future is a lvl 14 ability vs shield is a lvl 1 spell. A caster can counter many more attacks than a Chronomancer can force to be hits( 6 uses then death).
By this same logic above: If I used Wish to "I wish that attack that just missed was a hit instead." And then the caster used shield, the attack would then miss. Although in this case, counterspell would be triggered. Also Wish is not a reaction.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So a few of of my friends are arguing over how the new "Convergent Future" ability from Chronomancy works. The rules stat: When you or a creature you can see within 60 feet of you makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw, you can use your reaction to ignore the die roll and decide whether the number rolled is the minimum needed to succeed or one less than that number (your choice). I say that means, that if you need a 15, and you have a +3 prof bonus; then you choose 12 or 11. One of thinks you ignore all bonuses and take the straight number you need. Even if that number can not be rolled on a d20 (say you need 21 to barely pass). And the DM thinks it is the number you need before adding in bonuses, then once that number is chosen, then you add in your bonus. Making the ability pointless in terms of preventing someone from passing a save. Which I view is wrong and making over all ability near fully pointless. So I come out to the community to see what others think, and what the finally ruling of the power is.
RAI, it must be that "minimum needed to succeed or one less than that number (your choice)" is referring to the number on the dice needed to succeed (you are ignoring the dice roll). It does not say that you treat the roll as equal to (or one less than) the AC or DC. I'm not sure that the wording on this ability is air tight, but it seems pretty obvious that RAI you can choose to make the roll into a success or failure, your choice.
So are you asking whether it was intended for the ability to be pointless or not?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I think he wants to be able to point to this thread to say to his group: "Look friends, it shouldn't be pointless!!"
Imagine this playing out at the table.
DM: The gnoll swings his spear at you. I rolled a 16
Player: My AC is 16 that hits.
DM: Ha!
Player: Shucks!
Player: Wait! I use convergent future to make that 16 a 15 instead!
Player: Ha!
DM: Shucks!
DM: Wait! But the gnoll has a +2 bonus to hit, raising that 15 to a 17! It hits you anyway!
DM: Ha!
Player: Shucks!
Player: Wait! I cast shield, so now my AC is 21! The 17 misses!
Player: Ha!
DM: Shucks!
DM: Wait! You already used your reaction, so you can’t cast shield! The 17 hits!
DM: Ha!
Player: Shucks!
"Not all those who wander are lost"
By "minimum needed to succeed" is irrelevant whether it means adding bonuses or not. It's literally the minimum needed to succeed so it succeeds. 1 less than that by definition is a failure.
Say the DC is 15 and your bonuses are +5. The minimum needed to succeed if you include bonuses is 10 and the minimum without is 15. It makes no difference. You still attained the minimum needed to succeed so you succeeded.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
You can't roll a 21 on a 20-sided die so that can't happen.
If you go strictly RAW, "the number rolled is the minimum needed to succeed or one less than that number" would mean before you add bonuses. If your AC is 16 and I have a +5 bonus from my ability score and proficiency bonus then the "minimum needed" is 11.
1. Whatever the DM rules is the correct ruling...
2. It specifies the die roll. So if a check or a save were to require a roll of 21+ on a d20, it cannot succeed. Bonuses/penalties are applied to the result, but it makes no difference if static bonuses are applied before or after the roll is made to the check, attack, etc for practical purposes. If you have a +5 to save, does it matter if you add five to your roll or subtract five from the Save DC? If one has a bonus of +2 then a DC of 25 cannot succeed ever, likewise if one has a bonus of +6 then a DC of 5 cannot fail ever.
3. Attacks are different though, since a natural 20 always hits and a natural 1 always misses. Since you are changing the actual result of the die rolled, then if one had a +2 to hit and was trying to hit an AC of 35, then the roll becomes a natural 20, not only a hit, but a critical. Likewise, if one got hit by a +30 to attack roll with an AC of 10, the die would be changed to a 1 and thus miss.
Your DM can houserule whatever he wants, but his interpretation is not correct. If your AC is 15 and I have a +3 to hit, 12 is the minimum number I need to roll to succeed. It says you're choosing the minimum number rolled that you need to succeed. If that "rolled" wasn't in there he would have ground to stand on, but the way it is stated is that it takes into account your bonuses and ultimately you're deciding if the action succeeds or fails by changing the roll.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
How do I delete on this forum?!
I think this is the best explanation I've seen yet, I was wondering these myself but you really cleared it up, thank you.
My understanding is that it sets the attack/spell/ECT to either succeed by one or fail by one(I read it to say the to hit Target is what was rolled after bonuses or 1 less) then in reaction the target could still use an ability to change the outcome.
Fighter attacks: does a 7 hit?
DM: nope that misses the necromancer
Chronomancer: actually with my reaction it does now
Dm: the necromancer casts shield in reaction to your hit causing it to miss.
Or
DM: well I used my reaction earlier so now that's a hit
The ability raises a few questions.
1) Do other effects come before or after? (Presumably someone casting the shield spell comes after the use of this ability). Similarly, all possible known modifiers are applied with the most favorable values before determining what the die roll must have been for success or failure.
A fighter attacks and hits a wizard. The wizard casts shield. The other wizard on the fighters side uses this ability to turn the hit into a miss even with shield?
If the AC became say 26 and this could not be naturally rolled by the fighter does this mean the die roll becomes a 20 because 20's always hit? Thus turning the miss into a critical?
2) Can the ability be used to specify a number that can't be rolled? For example a DC25 ability check with only a +3 modifier would need a 22 to succeed. What if the character had guidance cast on them. Does the ability assume the maximum or minimum number possible for all modifiers? In this case, with guidance, a 20 could be a success if one assumed at least a 2 from the guidance die.
The way the fluff is written, the ability sounds like the caster chooses from a number of possible futures where the event is either a success or a failure. In such a case, modifiers should be as high or low as needed to ensure the desired outcome. For an impossible case, presumably there is no future where the event is resolved as desired.
Its an interesting ability and the intent seems to be to attempt to guarantee either success or failure assuming either is within the range of the possible die rolls so any pre-existing modifiers only matter in terms of whether the die roll is possible or not and any randomly determined pre-existing modifiers should be assigned their most favorable values (e.g. bless, resistance, guidance, bane etc depending on the type of roll).
On the other hand, how does this interact with shield or counterspell. If the ability is used to ensure a hit and the target casts shield does it prevent his ability from ensuring the hit?
This
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think that is specifically why it's worded so oddly. It allows your hit/miss to be counteracted by a new buff/debuffs after you use the ability.
This
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The ability raises a few questions.
1) Do other effects come before or after? (Presumably someone casting the shield spell comes after the use of this ability). Similarly, all possible known modifiers are applied with the most favorable values before determining what the die roll must have been for success or failure. It depends of if they are already in effect or not. The way I imagined it is: Roleplay wise (A fighter goes to hit an enemy spellcaster but final step was too shallow and the spellcaster thinks maybe he can dodge it leading to the fighter missing the hit. You see his final step and think the same thing the spellcaster does and uses your mastery over time to peer into the vast timelines and pull one in which he stepped closer and pulls those events into your reality. Now the fighter is magically placed closer to the spellcaster and he no longer thinks he can dodge so he decides to panic cast shield still causing the hit to miss.) IRL (the fighter rolled low and you used your ability and in response to the shift the spellcaster used shield).
A fighter attacks and hits a wizard. The wizard casts shield. The other wizard on the fighters side uses this ability to turn the hit into a miss even with shield? - Yes
If the AC became say 26 and this could not be naturally rolled by the fighter does this mean the die roll becomes a 20 because 20's always hit? Thus turning the miss into a critical? - I believe this is the case regarding attacks since a 20 is an auto hit and cannot happen otherwise. However with saves/checks its possible for you to still fail even when using this since you cant crit succeed/fail with those unless your DM allows crits on saves/checks.
2) Can the ability be used to specify a number that can't be rolled? For example a DC25 ability check with only a +3 modifier would need a 22 to succeed. What if the character had guidance cast on them. Does the ability assume the maximum or minimum number possible for all modifiers? In this case, with guidance, a 20 could be a success if one assumed at least a 2 from the guidance die. - Because the skill says "ignore the die roll and decide whether the number rolled is the minimum needed to succeed or one less" it has to be a number that can be rolled. With guidance I would assume that the person you cast it on has to decide if they use their guidance or not since it gets added to the "roll" you determine. I think they way the ability is worded they wanted to make a powerful skill for a time manipulator that wasn't impossible to balance. A true auto succeed or fail would be too powerful as you can just choose to have even the most powerful of creatures fail saving throws to spells that auto end the fight.
The way the fluff is written, the ability sounds like the caster chooses from a number of possible futures where the event is either a success or a failure. In such a case, modifiers should be as high or low as needed to ensure the desired outcome. For an impossible case, presumably there is no future where the event is resolved as desired. - Yes
Its an interesting ability and the intent seems to be to attempt to guarantee either success or failure assuming either is within the range of the possible die rolls so any pre-existing modifiers only matter in terms of whether the die roll is possible or not and any randomly determined pre-existing modifiers should be assigned their most favorable values (e.g. bless, resistance, guidance, bane etc depending on the type of roll).
On the other hand, how does this interact with shield or counterspell. If the ability is used to ensure a hit and the target casts shield does it prevent his ability from ensuring the hit? - Anything with a reaction cast time can effectively still change the outcome but counterspell states that you have to see them casting and it has to be a spell, and since this is an ability its most likely useless.
Any thoughts on how this ability interacts with advantage and disadvantage? Do advantage and disadvantage resolve first and then the die is replaced? Or does the creature still get to roll a second die and see if its higher (in the case of advantage) or lower (in the case of disadvantage)?
You get to choose which the effect applies to. From the rules on advantage and disadvantage:
So, you can make one but not both of the die fail or pass. This means that you really want to use this on rolls that are not made with advantage or disadvantage. I'm not sure if you actually get to see the results of the rolls before you take your reaction; but if your group lets you know the rolls, you might be able to still use the ability. "Bah, I rolled a 19 and a 5 with disadvantage on this very important save."... "I use my reaction to make that 5 pass."
Were I DM in this situation, I would rule as follows:
convergent future makes the hit, ability check, or save succeed or fail. "...ensuring a particular outcome..." "...ignore the die roll..."
If the roll required is outside 1-20 it doesn't matter. The table of ability checks goes from Very Easy to Nearly Impossible. You can't do the impossible, only the nearly impossible. This doesn't let a dwarf in plate armor fly by flapping his arms really fast. That is impossible. No die roll. Just "You cannot do that." I hate saying those words as a DM but sometimes I have to. This world has physics(and magic). Also, I would expect the wording of the feature to specify "...whether the number rolled(within the 1-20 range of a d20) is the minimum..." if this 'capstone' wizard ability has such a limitation.
Counterspell is not triggered because this isn't casting a spell, as was noted in a previous post.
shield does not prevent a hit. I know this isn't MTG but I apply it's 'stack' model in this way. Attack misses. Chronomancer changes that attack to a hit with convergent future. Hit now meets conditions for shield casting. Target casts shield. Now resolve events in stack order. Shield is cast, changing AC required for hit. Convergent future makes attack a hit. Attack is a hit, roll damage. I know this isn't MTG, and the stack isn't even used in MTg anymore?(idk I stopped playing long ago). But another justification for this ruling is that Convergent future is a lvl 14 ability vs shield is a lvl 1 spell. A caster can counter many more attacks than a Chronomancer can force to be hits( 6 uses then death).
By this same logic above: If I used Wish to "I wish that attack that just missed was a hit instead." And then the caster used shield, the attack would then miss. Although in this case, counterspell would be triggered. Also Wish is not a reaction.