"That's what the rules say. I mean, I'd never rule that way in my games because that's silly and unfun, but that's what the rules say."
I can't believe it took this long.
Separately, Lyxen, I'm curious about something you posted: "That would be a very specific case of wanting so badly to cast a spiritual weapon that one is prepared to waste a counterspell to counterspell aimed at the spiritual weapon. I don't see that as very likely..."
Would you feel the same way if you substituted "healing word to save an unconscious ally" for "spiritual weapon"? No malice, just curious.
Furthermore, the classes combinations able to use both counterspell and healing word is pretty limited anyway, I'm pretty sure you need a very specific build to do this.
Counterspell is probably one of the top contenders for Magical Secrets, and Bards can already cast Healing Word, so it's probably not as rare as you'd think.
As for a specific build, Counterspell is a top-tier choice for Magical Secrets, a Redemption Paladin has it always prepared and heck, a regular ol' Divine Soul Sorcerer could do this, for example.
I think you'd agree that an intelligent enemy might urgently counterspell the guy who's been healing and reviving his compatriots after putting the barbarian down for the third time.
I notice that there are four questions and zero answers in your reply, with a whatabout cherry on top. I will answer all four of yours.
Yes, that is the number of combinations presented and they are very common.
He doesn't need to know you're casting healing word specifically, he's intelligent and sees that you've been healing allies, and no, I wouldn't suppose he's counterspelling everything.
Players can be creative or not, and if they figure boring-but-effective-to-help-a-party-member-survive is their best option, I'm not there to stop them.
No, not that I can remember, and the frequency of this situation occurring doesn't have any bearing on what I asked.
"That's what the rules say. I mean, I'd never rule that way in my games because that's silly and unfun, but that's what the rules say."
I can't believe it took this long.
you have to know how the rules work, and understand how to apply them, before you start breaking them. Otherwise, you are acting in ignorance of what the broken rule might do. allowing counterspell to defend a bonus action is, IMO both fair and unlikely to have a huge impact on the overall game, but being able to cast, say, a 9th level hellish rebuke the same turn as a bonus action spell is a different story, most likely, especially given the damage scaling of the “correct” option (a cantrip)
RAF governs a lot at my table, and if it means bending the rules a bit for a cool moment I’ll do it, but I also try to make sure I know what is supposed to happen per RAW first so I can set limits on and rule-bending my players try and/or that I might allow, but if i didn’t know how the rule is supposed to work, I could be opening up a game breaking scenario
So he wouldn't do it on your first or even your second casting, right ?
As presumed in the hypothetical wherein he saw the caster heal, no, he has not counterspelled some healing.
Why do you expect the opposition to be clever and allow the players to be stupid and boring ?
I don't? Some enemies are clever and some aren't. In the scenario I presented the enemy is intelligent. And seriously, why would I allow players to be stupid and boring? Come on.
So if it never happens, why do you care about the way I would play it ?
I cared about how you would play it because the example bonus action spell was spiritual weapon and not healing word. I'm a curious guy. It made me curious if you'd feel the same way, at your table with your players. If they can't counterspell a counterspell against spiritual weapon, the immediate consequence is that they're not doing some bonus action damage and retain the 3rd level slot. The immediate consequence of disallowing counter-conterspell of healing word may be a life-or-death situation for the PC. You've answered my question now and I appreciate it.
you have to know how the rules work, and understand how to apply them, before you start breaking them. Otherwise, you are acting in ignorance of what the broken rule might do. allowing counterspell to defend a bonus action is, IMO both fair and unlikely to have a huge impact on the overall game, but being able to cast, say, a 9th level hellish rebuke the same turn as a bonus action spell is a different story, most likely, especially given the damage scaling of the “correct” option (a cantrip)
RAF governs a lot at my table, and if it means bending the rules a bit for a cool moment I’ll do it, but I also try to make sure I know what is supposed to happen per RAW first so I can set limits on and rule-bending my players try and/or that I might allow, but if i didn’t know how the rule is supposed to work, I could be opening up a game breaking scenario
I mean yes, I do understand what this discussion is, and I appreciate your further explanation. Just seems odd that that sentiment wasn't out there earlier. Would've squashed a number of frustrating offshoots.
I follow RAW on this and I don’t care what spells are being countered or not. I think it’s healthy for the table if a PC perma-dies every once in a while. Keeps the others on their toes.
I'm not sure, I was under the impression that you would allow it for someone to save the life of a barbarian who has already fallen three times by using the same spell over and over.
I meant to stress that I would *allow*, rather than disallow, players to do stupid and boring things generally. I'd be even more inclined to stay away from taking away a player's autonomy.
I used spiritual weapon because that was the example given to me previously by another contributor, that's all.
I understand, and wasn't concerned with who introduced the example.
Allowed during your Turn (no Action Surge)
"(None)" means doing something other than Cast a Spell.
Allowed during your Turn (Action Surge)
Disallowed
Anything not in the list above.
That's the AD&Deist thing I've ever seen.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
If you do mange to roll a Bonus Action/35 or above, you can sneak in a reaction spell. Bonus Action/00 and you can do an action spell beyond cantrips!
I know, I love it.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
"That's what the rules say. I mean, I'd never rule that way in my games because that's silly and unfun, but that's what the rules say."
I can't believe it took this long.
Separately, Lyxen, I'm curious about something you posted: "That would be a very specific case of wanting so badly to cast a spiritual weapon that one is prepared to waste a counterspell to counterspell aimed at the spiritual weapon. I don't see that as very likely..."
Would you feel the same way if you substituted "healing word to save an unconscious ally" for "spiritual weapon"? No malice, just curious.
Counterspell is probably one of the top contenders for Magical Secrets, and Bards can already cast Healing Word, so it's probably not as rare as you'd think.
I understand you were discussing RAW.
As for a specific build, Counterspell is a top-tier choice for Magical Secrets, a Redemption Paladin has it always prepared and heck, a regular ol' Divine Soul Sorcerer could do this, for example.
I think you'd agree that an intelligent enemy might urgently counterspell the guy who's been healing and reviving his compatriots after putting the barbarian down for the third time.
Never mind the Redemption Paladin - Healing Word is not on the Paladin spell list, so they won't get it without a fairly common multiclass.
I notice that there are four questions and zero answers in your reply, with a whatabout cherry on top. I will answer all four of yours.
you have to know how the rules work, and understand how to apply them, before you start breaking them. Otherwise, you are acting in ignorance of what the broken rule might do. allowing counterspell to defend a bonus action is, IMO both fair and unlikely to have a huge impact on the overall game, but being able to cast, say, a 9th level hellish rebuke the same turn as a bonus action spell is a different story, most likely, especially given the damage scaling of the “correct” option (a cantrip)
RAF governs a lot at my table, and if it means bending the rules a bit for a cool moment I’ll do it, but I also try to make sure I know what is supposed to happen per RAW first so I can set limits on and rule-bending my players try and/or that I might allow, but if i didn’t know how the rule is supposed to work, I could be opening up a game breaking scenario
As presumed in the hypothetical wherein he saw the caster heal, no, he has not counterspelled some healing.
I don't? Some enemies are clever and some aren't. In the scenario I presented the enemy is intelligent. And seriously, why would I allow players to be stupid and boring? Come on.
I cared about how you would play it because the example bonus action spell was spiritual weapon and not healing word. I'm a curious guy. It made me curious if you'd feel the same way, at your table with your players. If they can't counterspell a counterspell against spiritual weapon, the immediate consequence is that they're not doing some bonus action damage and retain the 3rd level slot. The immediate consequence of disallowing counter-conterspell of healing word may be a life-or-death situation for the PC. You've answered my question now and I appreciate it.
I mean yes, I do understand what this discussion is, and I appreciate your further explanation. Just seems odd that that sentiment wasn't out there earlier. Would've squashed a number of frustrating offshoots.
I follow RAW on this and I don’t care what spells are being countered or not. I think it’s healthy for the table if a PC perma-dies every once in a while. Keeps the others on their toes.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Thanks for that. Just for clarity's sake:
I meant to stress that I would *allow*, rather than disallow, players to do stupid and boring things generally. I'd be even more inclined to stay away from taking away a player's autonomy.
I understand, and wasn't concerned with who introduced the example.
If I knew how to do pajama striping on this forum I would have done the table in the orange style of AD&D books. :-)
The inside of the cover was orange, the tables were black white grey.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
So after pages and pages of this stuff...
Do you let the Bad Guys cast Reaction spells in the same turn as Bonus Action spells?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
No
Yes.