Supreme Court of Sauce

Quote from Fitz_Coulson >>

ALL HAIL SAUCE!

 HAIL!

SAUCE!

THE HAIL TO THE HAILY OF SAUCES AND THE SAUCE THAT HAILS IS THE SAUCIEST HAIL THAT EVER SAUCEY HAILED! CAN I GET AN AMEN?!

Amen

Quote from Fitz_Coulson >>

THE HAIL TO THE HAILY OF SAUCES AND THE SAUCE THAT HAILS IS THE SAUCIEST HAIL THAT EVER SAUCEY HAILED! CAN I GET AN AMEN?!

 Instead of an amen, how about a SAUCE!!!!

Quote from legolasgreenleaf333 >>

Quote from Fitz_Coulson >>

THE HAIL TO THE HAILY OF SAUCES AND THE SAUCE THAT HAILS IS THE SAUCIEST HAIL THAT EVER SAUCEY HAILED! CAN I GET AN AMEN?!

 Instead of an amen, how about a SAUCE!!!!

 I'll give you an AMAUCE!

Quote from JustDungeoning >>

Quote from legolasgreenleaf333 >>

Quote from Fitz_Coulson >>

THE HAIL TO THE HAILY OF SAUCES AND THE SAUCE THAT HAILS IS THE SAUCIEST HAIL THAT EVER SAUCEY HAILED! CAN I GET AN AMEN?!

 Instead of an amen, how about a SAUCE!!!!

 I'll give you an AMAUCE!

 😩🙏 Amauce

Hey guys, I know this doesn’t have anything to do with sauce, but I really need help with a ruling for counterspell! RAW, you can counterspell someone’s counterspell. However, this feels kind of annoying, as both casters would continue to counterspell each other’s counterspells until out of slots, with neither actually negating each other’s spells, and it just feels kind of like a waste of slots. My players going to encounter some mages tonight, and they’ve never actually encountered casters with counterspell at a level that they can cast counterspell too, so I feel like there will be a lot of complaints ("I counterspell his blight." "Great. He counterspells your counterspell" "That’s not fair!"), and a I feel that both me (the DM) and the players will end up feeling rather unsatisfied. My real question is, will not allowing counterspells to be counterspelled break the game?

Quote from legolasgreenleaf333 >>

Hey guys, I know this doesn’t have anything to do with sauce, but I really need help with a ruling for counterspell! RAW, you can counterspell someone’s counterspell. However, this feels kind of annoying, as both casters would continue to counterspell each other’s counterspells until out of slots, with neither actually negating each other’s spells, and it just feels kind of like a waste of slots. My players going to encounter some mages tonight, and they’ve never actually encountered casters with counterspell at a level that they can cast counterspell too, so I feel like there will be a lot of complaints ("I counterspell his blight." "Great. He counterspells your counterspell" "That’s not fair!"), and a I feel that both me (the DM) and the players will end up feeling rather unsatisfied. My real question is, will not allowing counterspells to be counterspelled break the game?

 In every card game I've ever played, whenever there is a card equivalent to a counterspell (like the NOPE from Ecploding Kittens), I always rule that a counter can't be countered, because that saps all the fun and usefullness out of it.

I'd personally say you cant counter a counterspell, but make it the same for both sides.

Quote from Great_Axeblade >>

Quote from legolasgreenleaf333 >>

Hey guys, I know this doesn’t have anything to do with sauce, but I really need help with a ruling for counterspell! RAW, you can counterspell someone’s counterspell. However, this feels kind of annoying, as both casters would continue to counterspell each other’s counterspells until out of slots, with neither actually negating each other’s spells, and it just feels kind of like a waste of slots. My players going to encounter some mages tonight, and they’ve never actually encountered casters with counterspell at a level that they can cast counterspell too, so I feel like there will be a lot of complaints ("I counterspell his blight." "Great. He counterspells your counterspell" "That’s not fair!"), and a I feel that both me (the DM) and the players will end up feeling rather unsatisfied. My real question is, will not allowing counterspells to be counterspelled break the game?

 In every card game I've ever played, whenever there is a card equivalent to a counterspell (like the NOPE from Ecploding Kittens), I always rule that a counter can't be countered, because that saps all the fun and usefullness out of it.

I'd personally say you cant counter a counterspell, but make it the same for both sides.

 Yes, I was going to rule it the same for both sides. Thanks!

Quote from legolasgreenleaf333 >>

Hey guys, I know this doesn’t have anything to do with sauce, but I really need help with a ruling for counterspell! RAW, you can counterspell someone’s counterspell. However, this feels kind of annoying, as both casters would continue to counterspell each other’s counterspells until out of slots, with neither actually negating each other’s spells, and it just feels kind of like a waste of slots. My players going to encounter some mages tonight, and they’ve never actually encountered casters with counterspell at a level that they can cast counterspell too, so I feel like there will be a lot of complaints ("I counterspell his blight." "Great. He counterspells your counterspell" "That’s not fair!"), and a I feel that both me (the DM) and the players will end up feeling rather unsatisfied. My real question is, will not allowing counterspells to be counterspelled break the game?

Counterspell uses a reaction, which you only get one of each round, so someone can't counterspell your counterspelling of their counterspell.

Quote from Halfastbracegirdle >>

Quote from legolasgreenleaf333 >>

Hey guys, I know this doesn’t have anything to do with sauce, but I really need help with a ruling for counterspell! RAW, you can counterspell someone’s counterspell. However, this feels kind of annoying, as both casters would continue to counterspell each other’s counterspells until out of slots, with neither actually negating each other’s spells, and it just feels kind of like a waste of slots. My players going to encounter some mages tonight, and they’ve never actually encountered casters with counterspell at a level that they can cast counterspell too, so I feel like there will be a lot of complaints ("I counterspell his blight." "Great. He counterspells your counterspell" "That’s not fair!"), and a I feel that both me (the DM) and the players will end up feeling rather unsatisfied. My real question is, will not allowing counterspells to be counterspelled break the game?

Counterspell uses a reaction, which you only get one of each round, so someone can't counterspell your counterspelling of their counterspell.

 I know, and so both sides just counterspell each others counterspells and their main spells aren't affected, so it feels like a waste of slots. So I'm probably going to rule that counterspells can't be counterspelled, and I was wondering if it would break the game at all?

Aaaaah! 3 days with no posts! SAUCE SAUCE SAUCE!!!!

Can you imagine coleslaw with ranch dressing instead of the usual sauce? mmmmmm...

                                       SAUCE

                                                                                                     SAUCE

                                       SAUCE

Mmmm

Sauceball

Some more saucey homebrew

Quote from Bubbub25 >>

 You're too late. Find your own thread to rickroll

rrrrrrrAAAAAAAGH

Quote from SpeedyTabaxi_CatsForLife >>

Sauceball

Some more saucey homebrew

 y'see, I copied the link to put it on the board, but I SAW THE LINK, YOU FAILED BWAHAHA

Wheeze