Listen man, just be happy they didn’t bring anti-magic field grenades.
For real though, even in settings that aren’t high magic, it would be reasonable that law enforcement would have something to neutralize magic. You think you’re the first spell-slinging murder hobo to come through here?
I wish anti-magic (in D&D specifically) felt less binary, and that there were more mechanics around encountering anti-magic of varying strengths. In a busy marketplace there might be weak anti-magic just to prevent basic illusory tricks, Distort Value, Incite Greed, etc. You could still cast such spells, but it might require a higher level slot to overcome the field, and/or maybe some effect would be triggered to make your use of magic obvious to whatever enforcers are around. Making sleight of hand more relevant to magic users for casting spells subtley enough to avoid triggering such effects would be super cool. Not hard to brew, but still would be nice to have that fleshed out in the base game.
Yeah, I think the somatic and verbal components were supposed to give away casters (making the sorcerer’s Subtle Spell incredibly valuable socially), but it seems like a lot of DMs ignore or minimize it. But yeah, things like a simple persistent Detect Magic field, especially in critical areas, would make perfect sense. In a high magic setting, every vendor having a trinket that grants them Detect Magic continuously wouldn’t be out of the question.
This is the kind of solution that makes me feel dumb. I am so stealing this
anti-magic field grenades
And the Lord spake, saying, ‘First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then, shalt thou count to three. No more. No less. Three shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once at the number three, being the third number be reached, then, lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.’
Where do they even get 30 people who can cast 3rd-level spells? That’s like an entire region’s supply of 5th-level characters. Are they in Eberron and using mass-produced wands of counterspell? Maybe they’re the entire high-threat response team of a major empire or planar metropolis.
I’m trying to game out how many of my characters it would take to rescue the player if that’s really 30 5th+ level antimages, and with that many counterspells on the field I think the answer is that they could probably shut down every spellcaster I’ve ever played, at least for long enough to take out the primary target. The only D&D character I’ve played who really has a hope of accomplishing anything is a very high level 4th edition fighter, and even at near-epic levels things still look dicey because I bet those guys are all packing a bunch of other spells like hold person and only one of them has to hit to really mess up his day. Maybe if he teamed up with the high level half-celestial paladin of freedom from 3.5…
Actually I just remembered you have to see your target to counterspell them, so actually some people like the 3.x Sublime Chord would be in the clear as long as they cast improved invisibility while out of sight, but I’m betting the anti-mages are prepared for that too, somehow. It might even things up though!
That’s like an entire region’s supply of 5th-level characters.
And they’re paladins, so they have to be 9th level redemption paladins.
I played one character that would have been able to deal with 30 5-th level paladins, but she made it to 40th level before the DM retired her and made her part of the pantheon. Once she was 17th it would have been barely doable, do to her having taken silent spell, still spell, and eschew materials, but once she was 21st level she’d steamroll that many low level characters with a single spell.
Kinda depends on the game they’re running, but DM has a point…
In shadowrun land (where everything is a lot more rock-paper-scissors-y) the opposition being prepared to counter a known team is basically a staple. If you’l control-thoughts’ed a bank teller, prepare for your apartment to be swarmed by 12 different types of drones.
“I guess I’m confused. Are we having fun, or it are we playing Unwinnable Logic Simulator against an adversarial DM?”
Because a true BBEG would conquer an area, then overwhelm us with 100% of its conscripted fighters…
I dunno man. I’ve had a lot of conversations with players that go like “do you think your character is the first to come up with this hijink? If it works, why doesn’t the entire setting revolve about this infinite damage trick you’re trying to sell me?”
Like, if it was as easy as casting Charm Person on the king to become the new ruler, other people would already be doing that. Therefore, there must be reasons why it doesn’t work.
I think it depends on the game and setting. If the DM wanted to make things realistic, this tracks. If the DM wants people to just play murder-hobos without consequences, then that’s fine too.
It’s role playing. Get your fantasy out.
But a DM’s job is to at least try and introduce the idea of consequences to the player’s actions.
And this seems like a reasonable response in all honesty.
A DM’s job is to make sure everyone has fun. If they want to make things realistic or they don’t want people to play murder-hobos, they should talk about it. And if they and the players can’t figure out a game that would make all of them happy, they split up and find new groups instead of playing a game that makes everyone unhappy.
The DM wasn’t happy with the player’s choices, and instead of talking to them about it, punished them with an unwinnable fight.
