Knowing what to Counterspell?

[charlesk]

As a bard I have often wanted to take Counterspell for its obvious benefits, and recently had it suggested to me again. The problem is that the the spell doesn't specify how you know what spell is being cast. At our table we've been playing that this is an Arcana check, but as a bard my relatively mediocre intelligence (modifier 0) would make this a poor proposition. And I don't want to start randomly countering stuff I can't identify.

Are we playing this wrong or is it just one of the weaknesses of a bard trying to counterspell?

[MrStabby]

A common variant is arcana check modified by level of the spell. Possibly modified further by if it is on your known list, known to your class or is your favoured school.

Arcana check of DC 10+spell level still tells you a lot. Specifically if a 13 doesn't tell you what it is, you know you can't automatically counter it. The higher you roll and don't know the bigger the spell is and the more important it is to use the counterspell (jack of all trades and a good CHA gives you a solid chance even against high level spells).

Even at worst you are paying a level 3 spell slot to have a caster waste a turn. You still get your action and bonus action so you come out ahead. Delaying that hold person out of a high level slot or that fireball till the group is in combat with the wizard's minions is still enough to turn the tide of a lot of fights.

Sometimes there is clearly one spell that is so obvious to cast that you are pretty sure what it is. Other times you know a caster has a signature spell.

[Ninja_Prawn]

A common variant is arcana check modified by level of the spell. Possibly modified further by if it is on your known list, known to your class or is your favoured school.

Clearly it varies by DM. I don't ask for a roll at all if the spell is on someone's list and of a level they could cast (even if they don't know it). I also allow Religion for cleric/paladin/favoured soul spells, though it's still Int so that doesn't help you.

At the end of the day, you have to trust your gut on Counterspell. How many casters are going to bluff you by opening with a Cantrip? Do you need to block the cleric (who, let's face it, is probably casting Bless), or should you wait for the sorcerer, who could be readying an empowered Cone of Cold? Should you keep your reaction back in case you need a Shield? It's a game, and making these decisions is what makes the game fun.

[Slipperychicken]

Arcana check of DC 10+spell level still tells you a lot. Specifically if a 13 doesn't tell you what it is, you know you can't automatically counter it. The higher you roll and don't know the bigger the spell is and the more important it is to use the counterspell (jack of all trades and a good CHA gives you a solid chance even against high level spells).


This is how it used to be. I think it's a shame they didn't include it in core this time around. Although many groups didn't really use it, even back then; apparently DMs get really mad about the idea that a character could have detailed knowledge of magic effects, even if they make the appropriate check. Apparently muggles are supposed to be utterly flabbergasted at the idea of magic, even when there are magicians wandering around in every environment, organization, gang, street corner, and random encounter worth mentioning. Not to mention the whole classes and guilds of scientists actively studying magic, writing books about it, and spreading their findings for the benefit of others.

[Demonic Spoon]

I don't think arcana checks to recognize spells makes sense from either a narrative or a balance standpoint.

Narratively, I don't see why a wizard should be able to recognize the chanting of a cleric of an arbitrary god and interpret a specific spell effect from that.

Balance-wise, being able to, as a reaction, remove a spellcaster's entire action is quite strong as it is without letting you cherrypick exactly which spells you counter.


Clearly it varies by DM. I don't ask for a roll at all if the spell is on someone's list and of a level they could cast (even if they don't know it). I also allow Religion for cleric/paladin/favoured soul spells, though it's still Int so that doesn't help you.

At the end of the day, you have to trust your gut on Counterspell. How many casters are going to bluff you by opening with a Cantrip? Do you need to block the cleric (who, let's face it, is probably casting Bless), or should you wait for the sorcerer, who could be readying an empowered Cone of Cold? Should you keep your reaction back in case you need a Shield? It's a game, and making these decisions is what makes the game fun.


I do something similar, except I'd require that the spell come from the same "source" (a cleric's casting of a particular spell is going to be different than a wizard's).

[Naanomi]

Unless they are using subtle spell (or a few other circumstances) I just let it happen automatically; counter spelling is good but trading actions and spell slots for actions and spell slots is a wash as it is, and extra rolls to slow things down isn't what I want.

If I were really worried about it I might say 'it looks like a stronger enchantment effect' instead of saying 'it's dominate' on the assumption that stuff (once cast) looks similar despite origin differences... Similar enough to respond to the same counterspell right?

[Demonic Spoon]

Unless they are using subtle spell (or a few other circumstances) I just let it happen automatically; counter spelling is good but trading actions and spell slots for actions and spell slots is a wash as it is, and extra rolls to slow things down isn't what I want.

If I were really worried about it I might say 'it looks like a stronger enchantment effect' instead of saying 'it's dominate' on the assumption that stuff (once cast) looks similar despite origin differences... Similar enough to respond to the same counterspell right?

it's a reaction and a spell slot against an action and a spell slot.

[bardo]

In our game there's no knowledge of what anyone else is casting. Counterspell is a spur-of-the-moment kind of thing, there's no time to think, just react, say counterspell and roll the caster ability check. It worked? Good. You still don't know what spell you countered.

AFAIK there's no mechanics in RAW to identify a spell someone else is casting. It used to be a Spellcraft check, but there's no Spellcraft in 5e. Intelligence checks of the Arcana, Nature, and Religion varieties are described as "your ability to recall lore about...". Recalling lore about a spell and identifying a spell as it is being cast are two very different things.

Of course you can house-rule those checks to identify spells. Your house your rules. I'm just saying RAW Counterspell is playable and fun for us.

Bardo.

[Millface]

it's a reaction and a spell slot against an action and a spell slot.

Important distinction there. A caster with counterspell prepared should always beat a caster without it prepared if you automatically know what they are casting. You nullify everything they do with your reaction and use your action to win the duel.

This is why I do arcana checks, if it was actually a straight up wash I would do it differently!

[Naanomi]

You mean wizard duals are spell and counterspell on both sides, each deciding when to use its limited resources and what spells to 'let through'? When to hold back your best spells until their resources are lower and maybe can't counter instead of blowing it in the first round? Doesn't sound too bad for me.

Counterspells, to me, happen after the spell is cast but before it takes effect.
The wizard does his incantation, the cleric chants his prayer to the sun God, the warlock says 'ha-do-ken!' in ancient demonic; but at the end of the day it is an undetonated mote of fire flying through the air ready to explode... The counterspell shoots it down before it goes off, but you see what is coming. Enchantment and Illusion spells are the grey area I will admit, which are cases I sometimes have exceptions for 'auto-detecting' the spell

As I said it has worked well for our table, and keeping combat free of extra rolls is worth it for me.

[Slipperychicken]

You guys do know that counterspell has a range of 60 feet right? If you stay 65 feet away from the caster, he can't counterspell you.

There's also the question of whether one can counterspell a counterspell. Which would add some depth to mage-duels.

[Ninja_Prawn]

There's also the question of whether one can counterspell a counterspell. Which would add some depth to mage-duels.

I see no RAW reason why you couldn't. Though you can only do it once, due to only having one reaction per round. Unless you've got multiple casters with Counterspell...

[rhouck]

There's also the question of whether one can counterspell a counterspell. Which would add some depth to mage-duels.

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ability-check


Can you also cast a reaction spell on your turn? You sure can! Here’s a common way for it to happen: Cornelius the wizard is casting fireball on his turn, and his foe casts counterspell on him. Cornelius has counterspell prepared, so he uses his reaction to cast it and break his foe’s counterspell before it can stop fireball.

[E’Tallitnics]

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ability-check

I was just going to quote that!

This seems super Meta-gamey doesn't it? It details that they know exactly what spell is being cast as it's being cast. No roll needed...

[rhouck]

I was just going to quote that!

This seems super Meta-gamey doesn't it? It details that they know exactly what spell is being cast as it's being cast. No roll needed...

It does. Partly I think it's an issue with how the fluff of Counterspell is written. They describe it as the spell "interrupt a creature in the process of casting a spell" so people (logically) interpret that as meaning mid-cast. I think if they describe it as countering after the spell is cast (e.g., as the lightning bolt crackles towards its targets), then it makes more sense as to how it can be easily identified. Otherwise, if it's midcast, then you're just going off knowing the incantation, gestures, and material components... which if you can't cast the spell yourself, seems a bit metagamey.

I like the idea of automatically being able to identify spells that you yourself can cast, and then an arcana check for those you cannot (i.e., you've read or heard about them, even if you can't actually cast them).

[E’Tallitnics]

It does. Partly I think it's an issue with how the fluff of Counterspell is written. They describe it as the spell "interrupt a creature in the process of casting a spell" so people (logically) interpret that as meaning mid-cast. I think if they describe it as countering after the spell is cast (e.g., as the lightning bolt crackles towards its targets), then it makes more sense as to how it can be easily identified. Otherwise, if it's midcast, then you're just going off knowing the incantation, gestures, and material components... which if you can't cast the spell yourself, seems a bit metagamey.

I like the idea of automatically being able to identify spells that you yourself can cast, and then an arcana check for those you cannot (i.e., you've read or heard about them, even if you can't actually cast them).

Is that just for the Wizard class though? I mean, a Sorcerer or Warlock get their magic from inherently "unstructured" sources. So just because Wizzy can cast Fireball doesn't mean she's going to have a clue that the spastic gestures of Ms. Wild Mage will result in Fireball!

However I think in keeping with the design philosophy of 5e I'll just continue to announce what spell is being cast and allow the players to Counterspell it or not. Same when they're the ones casting spells.

In my opinion anything else is way too much overhead on everyone's part!

[rhouck]

Is that just for the Wizard class though? I mean, a Sorcerer or Warlock get their magic from inherently "unstructured" sources. So just because Wizzy can cast Fireball doesn't mean she's going to have a clue that the spastic gestures of Ms. Wild Mage will result in Fireball!

However I think in keeping with the design philosophy of 5e I'll just continue to announce what spell is being cast and allow the players to Counterspell it or not. Same when they're the ones casting spells.

In my opinion anything else is way too much overhead on everyone's part!

It certainly is an assumption that every spell is cast the same way by everyone, which, I agree, is a bit odd when one considers the Sorcerer versus the Wizard! To justify it, I think you have to assume that there is only one combination of VSM components that allows any caster to tap into the Weave and cast a certain spell. So a Sorcerer just someone "knows" that same combo, even though they couldn't tell you HOW they know it -- it's just in their blood. That's at least how I'd fluff it, you are free to come up with your own :smallsmile:

[Naanomi]

I keep spellcasti get different (clerics cast different from wizards from warlocks etc) even the same class may have their own 'casting style' (I can tell you learned your fireball from a from teacher).

However I assume all casters can 'see' magic weaves to some effect, that the fire ball forming is the same regardless of the special effects in summoning it.

I do make an exception for illusion magic, if you are illusioning a fireball they don't automatically see it is fake, they can use the disbelief system for that illusion spell if they want to see past it. Low level illusions to draw out counterspells: valid Mage-fight tactics

[Slipperychicken]

It certainly is an assumption that every spell is cast the same way by everyone, which, I agree, is a bit odd when one considers the Sorcerer versus the Wizard! To justify it, I think you have to assume that there is only one combination of VSM components that allows any caster to tap into the Weave and cast a certain spell. So a Sorcerer just someone "knows" that same combo, even though they couldn't tell you HOW they know it -- it's just in their blood. That's at least how I'd fluff it, you are free to come up with your own :smallsmile:

If there is ambiguity in how spells are cast, that would be a perfect time to call for an intelligence(arcana) check to identify the spell. A character proficient in arcana would know patterns and trends associated with VSM components (whether from study, experience, or some combination), and could at least make an educated guess.

[Alucard2099]

This is what my team has decided.

Reaction
Expend at least a 3rd level spell slot
When you take damage from a spell that targets only you, you may use your reaction to cast a spell back at that target. The spell cannot be a higher level then the spell slot expended to use Counterspell, and must target only that creature.

I understand that this is different then the original spell, but I don't care. The mechanics of Counterspell in the book are too vague and my team would just argue about it. I believe this is a good solution.

[Demonic Spoon]

You mean wizard duals are spell and counterspell on both sides, each deciding when to use its limited resources and what spells to 'let through'? When to hold back your best spells until their resources are lower and maybe can't counter instead of blowing it in the first round? Doesn't sound too bad for me.

Given the short combat times and how devastating single spells can be, no fight would ever turn out this way. Furthermore, "wizard duels" don't happen because DnD is generally played with a whole party of PCs. If you're fighting a caster who can cast high level spells and you want to blow spell slots to counter them, you're just going to use counterspell every round until you've used too many slots or he's dead.


Counterspells, to me, happen after the spell is cast but before it takes effect.
The wizard does his incantation, the cleric chants his prayer to the sun God, the warlock says 'ha-do-ken!' in ancient demonic; but at the end of the day it is an undetonated mote of fire flying through the air ready to explode... The counterspell shoots it down before it goes off, but you see what is coming. Enchantment and Illusion spells are the grey area I will admit, which are cases I sometimes have exceptions for 'auto-detecting' the spell


That makes even less sense. Unless a spell has a really obvious effect before it goes off (seeing a small point floating through the air doesn't tell you it's going to explode as a fireball) or the mage has detect magic up, I don't see how that works, especially given that the mage has a fraction of a second to process what he's seeing.

[Vogonjeltz]

You guys do know that counterspell has a range of 60 feet right? If you stay 65 feet away from the caster, he can't counterspell you.

There's also the question of whether one can counterspell a counterspell. Which would add some depth to mage-duels.

It has a somatic component...so as long as the caster can see the counterspell taking place, I don't see why they couldn't. The fun part would be trying to gauge how strong a spell and counterspell each character is using. (i.e. do you stick with a 3rd level slot and hope you can beat the DC, or use a higher level slot hoping for an automatic success?)

If a player had counterspell I'd provide them the opportunity to use it before describing the effects of the spell (i.e. if there are somatic and verbal components, "the druid begins chanting and waving his hands around...did you want to do anything?") and if they decline, then they have to deal with the consequences.

[bardo]

Counterspells, to me, happen after the spell is cast but before it takes effect.

I dunno about that... the duration of fireball says instantaneous. To me once the casting is done the energy is released and will manifest itself one way or another. Therefore counterspell has to happen during the casting. This is also how reactions work in general, you take a reaction in the middle of someone else's turn. Think of when you take an attack of opportunity, it happens during someone else's movement, and if you kill them, trip them, whatever, it will interrupt their movement.

I think of counterspell as an attack of opportunity that uses magic.

Bardo.

[Thisguy_]

EDIT: There is a TL;DR at the end of all this.

My understanding of Counterspell is that, while your opponent delicately strokes the weave in an attempt to give it the inclination to explode the hell out of you with Fireball, your counterspell to that is in effect you curtly telling the weave to calm the hell down and smooth out. What he's doing, you are actively undoing, and therefore once he is done, you need to dispel his effect, as you no longer have an opposing caster's hands to guide your own in smoothing his reverberations.

Counterspell is actively mussing your opponent's side of the weave, dispel magic is carefully smoothing a part of the weave that is only being touched by you at the moment. As to determining what spell in particular is being cast? I'd say if you have clear, good sight of your opponent, can actively focus on what they're doing (uninterrupted by, say, the other guys' barbarian), and know the spell they're casting, you should be able to just identify it. Otherwise, you should not be able to identify it. This could get more complex. Ignoring material components, as spells should be readable just based on what's said and done (probably, imo at least):

If it's a verbal spell only, and you can hear them, and you know the spell, you can pick it out.

If it's somatic only, and you can see them, you can pick it out if you know it.

If it's verbal and somatic, you must see them and hear them to identify it, on top of knowing it.

If you do not know how to cast a spell, I imagine that the chances are you don't know what casting it in particular looks like, aside from "they say some made up words and wave their fingers about for a bit."

I don't think it makes a whole hell of a lot of sense for general knowledge on magic itself to apply so deeply as to identify a spell in particular as it's cast. Sure, the effects you can recognize afterwards (Oh, that was Fireball he immolated us with, guys!) but you cannot read it as it's done.

Now, as for spells cast more than once, after the second or third time they cover you in hot fire, you'll be able to reasonably say that their particular way of shouting at you and waving their hands around is likely to produce a certain effect, but that's more than likely less true for those who do not pay as much attention as others (read: low WIS characters with iffy Perception).

And this is all just for Wizard v. Wizard. The PHB tends to think that Wizards study a bit, and you can extrapolate that they'd learn about a spell in a certain way since they're such methodical casters. A similar argument could be made of Clerics of the same god or Druids on the whole; that argument may even be made for Clerics of different gods provided you think that they're going to cast similarly enough in your setting. But a Lyre Bard identifying a Flute Bard's unique way of casting a certain spell? Unlikely.

For Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Bards (and if I miss anyone, it's 3am, I'm sorry), every individual is pretty likely to cast in a different way. I can see a Warlock of Asmodeous recognizing another's granted Fireball, but the Warlock class is all about learning magical secrets. Same Patron, probably, but I don't see them identifying a spell another is casting when their patron isn't exactly the same.

Sorcerers are all born with it. They therefore cast in pretty unique ways de facto so far as I can tell, so there's no guessing what they're going to sling. I can't even vouch for the likelihood that they will cast in a consistent manner from one Fireball to the other.

And I've already touched on Bards. From what I can tell, a Bard is someone who has discovered the secret to laying mystic power subtly in as an element of their music, or as part of their wording, rhythm, and intonation for the more poetically and less musically inclined. One Bard, I am fairly sure, will cast a spell completely differently from another. Even somewhat differently from another who uses the same method (be it poetry, lute, lyre, hurdy-gurdy, or what have you).

As this post seems to have become rather long winded and detailed, I'll sum it up:

TL;DR I think you should just play it by ear, based on what makes sense to you. I think these things:

A methodical caster will have identifyable spells, easy to sense coming if you know the spell yourself;

A caster imbued with unique or semi-unique magics is unlikely to have identifiable spells without some attention to detail on the part of the identifier;

A Wizard probably doesn't understand how Clerics cast and vice versa, so different classes should have a very hard time picking out what each others' spells are.

EDIT: Ever write on a post for so long the site logs you out? Heh. I actually have more to say on the subject of whether it's powerful enough in the first place just to be able to counterspell (I think it is) and advice on watdo when you want to hit hard with it (predict your opponent's decisions). But it's really, really late/early.

[charlesk]

Some interesting stuff in here, thank you.

[MaxWilson]

It certainly is an assumption that every spell is cast the same way by everyone, which, I agree, is a bit odd when one considers the Sorcerer versus the Wizard! To justify it, I think you have to assume that there is only one combination of VSM components that allows any caster to tap into the Weave and cast a certain spell. So a Sorcerer just someone "knows" that same combo, even though they couldn't tell you HOW they know it -- it's just in their blood. That's at least how I'd fluff it, you are free to come up with your own :smallsmile:

An alternative is to say that they recognize not the words and gestures, but the magical effects. When you Fireball, I sense the gathering fire energy as you're preparing to unleash it, and I can Counterspell it before it happens. When you Dominate, I sense the mental chains you're building before you can unleash them. When you Teleport, I feel space twisting around you. It's the same sense that allows me to be a wizard in the first place: the ability to sense what magic is doing. Without it, trying to learn spellcasting is like a deaf man trying to teach himself to write symphonies.

[E’Tallitnics]

An alternative is to say that they recognize not the words and gestures, but the magical effects. When you Fireball, I sense the gathering fire energy as you're preparing to unleash it, and I can Counterspell it before it happens. When you Dominate, I sense the mental chains you're building before you can unleash them. When you Teleport, I feel space twisting around you. It's the same sense that allows me to be a wizard in the first place: the ability to sense what magic is doing. Without it, trying to learn spellcasting is like a deaf man trying to teach himself to write symphonies.

Not a bad suggestion, but how would a DM announce that at the table without giving away too much information?

[Mith]

You could use key words that describe the Arcane Traditions. For example "Cold and Lifeless" for Necromancy. I cannot really thing of other good tags for the other traditions at the moment.

[Logosloki]

Not a bad suggestion, but how would a DM announce that at the table without giving away too much information?
Probably skill check. Set it at skill+spell level and grant information by how much they beat it by. For example just passing grants spell level, beat by 5 they know what school it is from, beat
by 10 the spells name, etc.

[E’Tallitnics]

You could use key words that describe the Arcane Traditions. For example "Cold and Lifeless" for Necromancy. I cannot really thing of other good tags for the other traditions at the moment.

The problem I see here is if the DM grants player knowledge of the school, there are a few schools that the players might gladly skip. “Illusion”, for example…

[ProphetSword]

Since there aren't any rules about it, I try not to overthink it at my table. I announce what spells the enemies are casting (players do the same on their turn). We just assume as part of the story that the wizards have had years of training in recognizing spells and sorcerers can detect what's happening in the weave around them. Slowing down combat with extra rolls to figure out the spells slows down the action and goes against my stance that the game should be fast and fun.

Some will rule differently, and that's fine. I rule what is fun for my group. If you find extra rolling to be fun for your group, then just do what works.

[Mith]

The problem I see here is if the DM grants player knowledge of the school, there are a few schools that the players might gladly skip. “Illusion”, for example…

Fair enough.

[DemonSlayer6]

The way our DM has been handling it is that you need a Perception check to determine if you can make out the spell components involved. If you pass, or are directly targeting the enemy spell-caster then you can make out what they are doing because you've been watching them.

This then gets to a slight complication area. If we want to try and identify it, we can make an Arcana check to see if we know the spell. If we know the spell (either we pass the check or it's on our lists or one of our teammates uses it frequently) then we can choose to counter it.

Or we can always counter blindly, because an enemy spell-caster will more likely cast "Fireball" than "Bless" or "Cure Wounds" on their enemies.

[CNagy]

I make my players Counterspell blind. To account for that on the enemy's side, I have enemy casters either a) always Counterspell if possible, even against spells which aren't worth countering, b) Counterspell if possible 50% of the time, based on a die roll, or c) never Counterspell. This is decided when I make the encounter, though if the party has been having an easy time of it I do sometimes shift a sometimes or never Counterspeller to an always Counterspeller at the very start of the encounter.

My reasoning is that Counterspell triggers after you see someone in the process of casting a spell, so you don't know what it is that they are casting. In a lot of circumstances, it is simply better to be safe than sorry. But at the same time, when my players cast spells, they tell me exactly what they want to cast and where. If I chose to tactically Counterspell with enemy spellcasters, it would be making use of knowledge those spellcasters shouldn't have. "Just a magic missile? We'll let it through. Slow? No." So Counterspell behavior is spelled out ahead of time, with a d6 roll for the maybes.