Using your tools only replaces the Material component, if a spell requires verbal or somatic components the tools don’t replace them. Either way, even a material component usage (or a focus, which is what the tools are) should be visible, and if you can see it, it can be counterspelled
With the rules in hand, I already know that they still have a verbal and somatic component, the point is that that seems to me to make no sense. If, for example, you are an artillerist and what you are supposed to have in your hand is a pistol that you have to have a verbal component, it seems like a joke.
Why do you think it is a joke? The Artificer is still using and manipulating arcane energy to create a magical effect. Are you a DM trying to decide whether or not to allow it or are you a player sulking because the DM used counterspell on your Artificer?
With the rules in hand, I already know that they still have a verbal and somatic component, the point is that that seems to me to make no sense. If, for example, you are an artillerist and what you are supposed to have in your hand is a pistol that you have to have a verbal component, it seems like a joke.
...It's magic; it doesn't have to conform to any rules other than what is printed, and it doesn't have to conform to "real-world" sensibilities either (there is no analogue for magic in the real world anyway). Magic spells in D&D requires some form of either verbal, somatic, and/or material requirements. This doesn't change based on what class is accessing the magic. Just because an artificer accesses magic differently than most other classes (they all do it differently btw) doesn't mean that the requirements for certain spells change.
If an artificer is using tools as a focus, they are providing material (and somatic, if a spell requires both) components...the verbal is not replaced by the tools. This is no different from a warlock using a focus, or a ranger using a component pouch; where they use those items, an artificer uses their tools; there is no extra benefit or exception; and because the verbal is visible (and audible) and the somatic/material is visible, using counterspell is an option.
If you want to be able to have "counterspell-proof" spellcasting, multiclass into a sorcerer and take subtle spell metamagic; thats the only class-based ability that allows spells to not be counterspelled (at least as long as you have sorcery points to spend, anyway)
If the artificier use his tool to Cast a spell, doesnt need verbal components, and a standard spellcaster can really counter his spells?
The artificer is still casting a spell just like every other class that has spells, no matter what they're using for components. The only requirements for Counterspell are that the one contering has their reaction available to use, and sees a creature(yes, you count as a creature) casting a spell within 60 feet of them. What is it about artificers that you think restricts the use of Counterspell further than that?
Artificers are somewhat similar to wizards. They use tools and tech instead of wands, but they still understand that certain sounds and movements are needed to make the magic happen.
However you choose to describe your casting, remember that artificers still follow all the same rules of other spellcasters and are just as vulnerable to counters.
i understand the responses but the artificers spellcasting section says you don't appear to be casting spells in a conventional way; you appear to produce wonders from mundane items and outlandish inventions. counterspell casting time says Casting Time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell so i would make the argument that because you dont appear to be casting a spell a caster would not know its a spell and would there fore not be able to target you with counterspell
And the obvious counter to that is even though you don’t appear to be casting in the conventional way, you still appear to be casting.
Or the less obvious counter, counterspell doesn't trigger on you knowing that someone is casting, it triggers on you seeing them in the process of spell casting. RAW it could be used to counter a subtle V, S spell. No one plays it like that, in fact they've released SAC saying that it doesn't work that way, but that's what the actual rules state.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If the artificier use his tool to Cast a spell, doesnt need verbal components, and a standard spellcaster can really counter his spells?
Using your tools only replaces the Material component, if a spell requires verbal or somatic components the tools don’t replace them. Either way, even a material component usage (or a focus, which is what the tools are) should be visible, and if you can see it, it can be counterspelled
Yes
With the rules in hand, I already know that they still have a verbal and somatic component, the point is that that seems to me to make no sense. If, for example, you are an artillerist and what you are supposed to have in your hand is a pistol that you have to have a verbal component, it seems like a joke.
Why do you think it is a joke? The Artificer is still using and manipulating arcane energy to create a magical effect. Are you a DM trying to decide whether or not to allow it or are you a player sulking because the DM used counterspell on your Artificer?
...It's magic; it doesn't have to conform to any rules other than what is printed, and it doesn't have to conform to "real-world" sensibilities either (there is no analogue for magic in the real world anyway). Magic spells in D&D requires some form of either verbal, somatic, and/or material requirements. This doesn't change based on what class is accessing the magic. Just because an artificer accesses magic differently than most other classes (they all do it differently btw) doesn't mean that the requirements for certain spells change.
If an artificer is using tools as a focus, they are providing material (and somatic, if a spell requires both) components...the verbal is not replaced by the tools. This is no different from a warlock using a focus, or a ranger using a component pouch; where they use those items, an artificer uses their tools; there is no extra benefit or exception; and because the verbal is visible (and audible) and the somatic/material is visible, using counterspell is an option.
If you want to be able to have "counterspell-proof" spellcasting, multiclass into a sorcerer and take subtle spell metamagic; thats the only class-based ability that allows spells to not be counterspelled (at least as long as you have sorcery points to spend, anyway)
The artificer is still casting a spell just like every other class that has spells, no matter what they're using for components. The only requirements for Counterspell are that the one contering has their reaction available to use, and sees a creature(yes, you count as a creature) casting a spell within 60 feet of them. What is it about artificers that you think restricts the use of Counterspell further than that?
Artificers are somewhat similar to wizards. They use tools and tech instead of wands, but they still understand that certain sounds and movements are needed to make the magic happen.
However you choose to describe your casting, remember that artificers still follow all the same rules of other spellcasters and are just as vulnerable to counters.
i understand the responses but the artificers spellcasting section says you don't appear to be casting spells in a conventional way; you appear to produce wonders from mundane items and outlandish inventions. counterspell casting time says Casting Time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell so i would make the argument that because you dont appear to be casting a spell a caster would not know its a spell and would there fore not be able to target you with counterspell
And the obvious counter to that is even though you don’t appear to be casting in the conventional way, you still appear to be casting.
One of the guides to everything provides optional rules for identifying spell casting that would still cover artificer casts.
Or the less obvious counter, counterspell doesn't trigger on you knowing that someone is casting, it triggers on you seeing them in the process of spell casting. RAW it could be used to counter a subtle V, S spell. No one plays it like that, in fact they've released SAC saying that it doesn't work that way, but that's what the actual rules state.