Counterspell, how much can be read from enemy casters motions.

[Rhaegar]

I'm a relatively new DM running my first campaign. My players are currently level 4, with my wizard planning on picking up counterspell as soon as he reaches level 5. We had a recent discussion about how much he as a wizard could pick up and tell from the enemy casters hand motions before he casts counterspell, and that in several instances he should know the spell the enemy is casting if it's a spell he's familiar with to know whether he wants to counterspell it or not. I have a few concerns with this.

1. Are the hand motions for a spell the exact same from caster to caster? Do all wizards cast the same spell the exact same way. If all wizards cast the spell the same way, is it cast the same between wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks?

2. You have to counterspell before the enemy caster gets the full spell off, so if you wait until the full hand motions complete, the spell is off, and you can't counter it. Then how varied are the hand motions, if you need to cast the counterspell before it goes off, you may only see the first half of the hand motions before you need to make that split second decision, would the beginning hand motions for one spell be exactly the same for another spell, with only the ending hand motions be different?

3. Could 2 spells have the exact same hand motions with different wording. If the caster is casting as a whisper, you would just see the hand motions and not realize the differences in the varied words.

4. Battles can be fairly fast and intense, with everything that is going on, with the wizard 50ft+ back, with the rogue and barbarian in melee with the caster, how much of the hand motions can the wizard see in the heat of battle in that 1-2second cast time, with other players and objects in the way. Perception check?

5. Am I way overthinking things?

How do other DMs handle counterspell, in regards to information the player might get, if any, before the enemy gets the spell off.

[JellyPooga]

5. Am I way overthinking things?

Yes.

You've got a couple of ways of handling this.

1) Tell the player what you're casting.
2) Tell the player the level of the spell your casting only.
3) Tell the player either of the above only if it's a spell he knows.
3a) Allow an Arcana or Religion check to see if he knows/has heard of the spell.
4) Never tell the player anything about what you're casting.

Pick your poison, but stick to it.

As written, I take the implication that option (4) is intended; nothing in the spell description says anything about identifying the spell to be Counterspelled, only that a spell is being cast, but that's only my opinion (and I'm a fairly harsh GM).

[gfishfunk]

Practically, I would imagine that the player / character knows the spell being cast.

The GM (myself included) usually just announce the spell (or a save requirement), and then the character uses the reaction to counterspell it after it is announced. I'm okay with the player knowing what the spell is and using that information to make an informed decision - its not game-breaking, really.

1. GM discretion. No rules on it.

2. I'm not sure you are correct: I think the trigger is "when the character sees another character cast a spell" or some close variant, so as long as the spellcaster is seen, it does not really matter where in the mix it is. As a GM you don't want to deny the player's ability to do their stuff with crap like "well, you didn't see it," or "Its too late". The key is that you will need to give the player enough information prior to the effect of the spell so that the player can react. Do you really want to draw it out with "you see the wizard make several gestures and mutter incantations" prior to every time you have one cast a spell? Then do a perception check or knowledge check? And then do the spell? Its a bit clunky - I think it would take more time that it would be worth for no real heightened enjoyment.

3. Gm discretion. No rules on it.

4. If you were committed to it: perception check to see what, maybe arcane check to determine what. But its this same reason that I would avoid putting too much onto it: combat should be fast paced.

5. Yes, but if that is how you want to play it, just let your players know so that they can make informed choices.

BONUS 6. Also, many spells require a distinctive material component, which might be a more definitive way of determining what the spell is.

[theMycon]

1. Are the hand motions for a spell the exact same from caster to caster? Do all wizards cast the same spell the exact same way. If all wizards cast the spell the same way, is it cast the same between wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks?

2. You have to counterspell before the enemy caster gets the full spell off, so if you wait until the full hand motions complete, the spell is off, and you can't counter it. Then how varied are the hand motions, if you need to cast the counterspell before it goes off, you may only see the first half of the hand motions before you need to make that split second decision, would the beginning hand motions for one spell be exactly the same for another spell, with only the ending hand motions be different?

3. Could 2 spells have the exact same hand motions with different wording. If the caster is casting as a whisper, you would just see the hand motions and not realize the differences in the varied words.

4. Battles can be fairly fast and intense, with everything that is going on, with the wizard 50ft+ back, with the rogue and barbarian in melee with the caster, how much of the hand motions can the wizard see in the heat of battle in that 1-2second cast time, with other players and objects in the way. Perception check?

5. Am I way overthinking things?

How do other DMs handle counterspell, in regards to information the player might get, if any, before the enemy gets the spell off.

tl;dr: Go with rules you'd be comfortable the player applying to you. Discuss them with the player beforehand. Come to an agreement and make it clear you follow these same rules. Because they will do every trick you do, and everyone will be (justifiably) pissed if you apply different standards.

1) Some parts of the PHB/DMG imply yes, others imply no. It's up to the DM and should probably be discussed with the player out of game.

2-4) This could all apply, but in general any "gotcha" tricks are a **** move, and generally turn into an arms race of one-upmanship. If you do it once, expect the player to pull these tricks every single time, or just say "I turn facing the other direction" and be immune to counterspell until you justify cheating applying different rules the the player(s) so you can use tricks that you don't want them to.

5) Probably.

Remember, as the DM you are God and can hand-wave whatever you want. That doesn't mean you SHOULD find some justification to do what you want. Heat of the moment clever solutions often looks like heat of the moment handwave-away-my-toys to everyone else. In 99% of situations, the best solution is to hash out details with the players out-of-game as soon as you realize there will be an issue, and make sure you both follow the same rules. If you find something they do abusive ask the player to tone it down before you start a ****-waving contest. Win or lose, those never end well.

Personally, I make the player use an Arcana check (DC 10 + Spell level*2) to ID the spell, regardless of distracting circumstances, and give them 5 seconds to decide to counterspell whether or not they make the check. I've considered upping the difficulty to 15 + 2*level, but then my creatures would rarely get it, even though I (as DM) always know the spell. I occasionally do add ad-hoc difficulty (+5 because they're invisible/you're blind/other total concealment, -2 because it's on your list, -Yes because you've used this spell a hundred times), but I use it sparingly in situations that're hard to replicate.

Edit: Added tl;dr and examples of ad-hoc DC changes.

[gfishfunk]

Personally, I make the player use an Arcana check (DC 10 + Spell level*2) to ID the spell, regardless of distracting circumstances, and give them 5 seconds to decide to counterspell whether or not they make the check. I've considered upping the difficulty to 15 + 2*level, but then my creatures would rarely get it, even though I (as DM) always know the spell. I occasionally do add ad-hoc difficulty (+5 because they're invisible/you're blind/other total concealment), but I use it sparingly in situations that're hard to replicate.

I like this a LOT. That is fantastic.

For added flare: the arcana check is for the feel of the spell in the ether - so if some gestures are obscured (or someone turns their back, whatever), you can still feel the spell and identify it.

As is, I'm stealing this........ /snip

[D.U.P.A.]

I am a bit reluctant with arcana check, as the spell becomes significantly worse in the hands of non-int casters like Sorcerer or Warlock.

[theMycon]

I feel I should also say:
Don't add too many extra dice rolls to combat. Especially ones that're off turn, and that only one player can participate in. Like gfishfunk said, combat should be fast paced.

My (unofficial) goal is to make sure any time a rules discussion happens in combat, it's because the player initating the action isn't sure how to do what he wants to do.

[JellyPooga]

I am a bit reluctant with arcana check, as the spell becomes significantly worse in the hands of non-int casters like Sorcerer or Warlock.

I'm against the Arcana check, myself. For me, Counterspell has two potential effects;

1) Blanket counterspell. This is the "I pump so much awesome into my counterspell it doesn't matter what they're casting...it's not going off". This is the automatic success. In this case, the actual spell is irrelevant.

2) Tailored Counterspell. This is the "let me see if I can figure it out before he gets it off" version. This is what the Caster Level check is for; it's more efficient, because it uses less raw power (lower level spell slot), but the Counterspeller has to work out what spell it is he's trying to counter.

Basically what I'm saying is that the Counterspell already accounts for the counterspeller working out what the spell is. That's why I don't think the Player should know anything about the spell he's counterspelling. As GM, you tell the player, "The Archvillain is casting a spell" and the Player must choose a) whether to Counterspell at all and b) what level slot he wants to use on it. Want to play it safe? Throw your highest level slot at it. Want to take a chance that your Counterspell will fail? Just use that 3rd level slot instead.

[loremaps]

Just try to avoid making counterspell more circumstantial than it already is. Keep in mind that your caster has selected it over other spells to specifically block enemy casters :)

[CantigThimble]

I think a pretty reasonable way to do it is just to tell them the level of the spell because you can tell from the buildup of energy. (NOTE, players should also do this when casting spells while enemy counterspellers are around, try to keep things fair and avoid metagaming with your NPCs)

In terms of recognizing specific spells I'd say that adding a roll or keeping track of what you're familiar with just complicates things too much. If you want to make it an option then let people with arcana proficiency recognize warlock and wizard spells, religion proficiency recognize paladin and cleric spells and nature proficiency recognize druid, ranger and sorcerer spells. I put sorcerer in the nature category because nature has to do with magical creatures like dragons who can spontaneously do magic and I want nature proficiency to be better.

[eastmabl]

Just try to avoid making counterspell more circumstantial than it already is. Keep in mind that your caster has selected it over other spells to specifically block enemy casters :)

I'll build on this. I would say that you want to make it useful without having to bog down play with unnecessary dice rolls.

I would give the player the following information:

1. The approximate spell level - "it looks to be..."


rote - cantrip
weak - two or more levels lower than your player's highest spell slot
potent - +/- one level of your player's highest spell slot
very powerful - two or more levels higher than your player's highest spell slot


At higher levels, you could add additional descriptors as appropriate.

2. What the approximate affect will be - "it looks offensive/protective/a buff/(whatever's appropriate)."

3. If the caster has already cast the spell, I would tell the caster what the spell is - "it looks like he's casting fireball again." Once the player's seen it, the cat's out of the bag.

Using the three above factors, you provide the player with enough information about the spell to make an informed decision without bogging down the game too much.

[swrider]

In addition to spell level or some indication of power you may also give spell school. The spells schools should be different enough from one another that you could tell them apart, in my opinion.

I.E. you could say a low level abjuration spell or a mid level necromancy spell.

[Socratov]

Our group handles counterspell as follows. If someone who knows counterspell knows a spell is being cast, he can decide from which slot s/he casts it. Then the DM either tells to roll an arcana check (indicating no auto-counter) or that the spell has been countered. Then, if the player is supposed to roll, the player rolls, announces the result, and the DM meanwhile tells the player wether the counterspell was successful.

This way it's less equal-but-opposing-force, but more a release of arcane energy to disrupt the manipulation of the weave. This, however, does not tell what kind of spell the enemy caster was casting, unless a character has the spell prepared or as spell known (if a spellcaster of the nonpreparing variant).

As for spell recognition, if you focus less on the materials used and the verbal and somatic components , and more on the fact that it's magic and an active way of telling reality to sit down and shut up that this magic can be seen as manipulating the fabric of reality (or the Weave) and that such effects are fairly recognisable if you know the spell.

It hasn't come up yet, but Id rule that if a player wanted to study the spell effects to determine the spell s/he could use an action to identify it through an Arcanacheck of 10+spelllevel. Separate from the counterpell check (which I would see as "Do I recognize enough of the spell to know how to disrupt it" instead of " do I know the spell?"). I'd say that if you have countered it the last time that you'd get advantage on the next round to identify it.

[Segev]

Honestly, they're using a spell slot and a reaction to do nothing but thwart another character's spell slot and action. I'm inclined to let them know what is cast.

DM: Eve Lynn casts fireball centered on the bard!
Abjurer PC: Oh, no she doesn't! I just got finished making that new magical mandolin for him, and she is NOT scorching the finish. Counterspell!

This doesn't bother me. I see it not as him somehow unmaking the effect before it exists, but rather seeing the spell forming and streaking out, and cancelling it as it's coalescing. He knows what's about to happen by the time he decides to say "nope!"

It's potent, but it's not unstoppably good. And little is more annoying than learning the spell you just wasted your spell slot and reaction countering was something that you didn't care about.

[mer.c]

I think a pretty reasonable way to do it is just to tell them the level of the spell because you can tell from the buildup of energy. (NOTE, players should also do this when casting spells while enemy counterspellers are around, try to keep things fair and avoid metagaming with your NPCs)

Maybe you could achieve the same level of character agency while revealing less information to the party like so:

Assume higher-level spells take longer to cast. So if someone's casting Mage Armor, you'll soon know they're casting a low-level spell (because very soon, it's been cast). But when they first start casting, for all you know, it could be a level 1 spell, or a level 9 spell, or anything in-between. After the first increment has passed, you'd know it's not a level-1 spell either, but it could still be anything 2 to 9. Then a moment later you'd know somewhere between 3 and 9. Etc.

The DM could represent that by counting up each increment from 1 (or 0) to 9, but that would suck. Instead, if a player wants to counter, ask them "What's your minimum level to counter?" If they want to counter anything no matter what, they could say 1 (or 0 for Cantrips). If they want to save it for bigger spells, they could say, for example, 5. So then they'd counter anything from level 5 up, because by the time the casting has gone on long enough to reach 5, they know it's level 5 or bigger.

That way, you're not revealing anything about the spell before they make their decision, but you're still giving them agency in what power level of spell they want to counter. And it's pretty intuitive.

If you wanted, you could also fluff that the PC readies the counterspell when it hits that threshold, and then decides how much energy to pump into it (at what level to cast the counterspell) when their target is unleashing the magic. That would let them make a more informed decision about what level to cast the counter. It would play out like this:

DM: The villain begins casting a spell.

Player: I counter at level 6 or above.

DM: OK. The spell is Finger of Death.

Then EITHER

Player: I'll counter at level 7.

DM: The spell is countered.

OR

Player: Hmm, I don't want to use a level-7 slot. I'll counter at level 6.

DM: OK, roll for the counter.


All that said, I'm inclined to go with the "Just tell them the spell" line of thought. Like Segev said, they're already using precious resources on the counter. And they're also making a risk-reward decision on whether to cast at an auto-counter level or to chance using a lower-level slot at the risk of the counter failing.

[Pex]

I am a bit reluctant with arcana check, as the spell becomes significantly worse in the hands of non-int casters like Sorcerer or Warlock.

Allow proficiency if it's on the class's list. Allow Advantage if the character knows it. For wizards allow Advantage if of the character's specialty. Still, if the character does have low Int this is just an unfortunate consequence of doing so. It's not somehow more unfair than a fighter in platemail needing to make a Stealth check when he's not proficient and has only 10 in DX.

[bardo]

There's no way to tell what someone else is casting. There were ways in previous editions with Spellcraft and Arcana checks, but there is no way in 5th edition. Spellcraft no longer exists, and Arcana (and also History/Nature/Religion skills) is clearly described as a means to "recall lore", no more.

Reactions interrupt someone else in the middle of them doing something. You can play it as actually interrupting the DM when the DM says "evil wizard casts ...", but that might be a little to fast-pace or just plain rude for your group.

If you don't want interruptions, give the players a window of opportunity before each NPC/monster takes its turn. Say "It's evil wizard's turn" and add a little pause while you think about what evil wizard will do. During this pause the players can say "I'll counterspell whatever she casts". It sounds a like a readied action, but it's not. Don't confuse the two. It's just a more polite way of interrupting. This scheme works well for other reaction-based abilities like the Lore Bard's Cutting Words.

Enforce the distance limit. It's 60'. Also you have to be able to see the caster.

When a player casts counterspell ask what level spell slot they wish to use. Using a higher level spell slot raises the auto-success bar and the player might be interested in avoiding a roll. It's also very amusing to see a player burn a 6th level spell slot to counterspell a cantrip. Not that the player would know. In case of auto-success you just say the spell fizzles. If a roll is required you ask for the roll without saying what the DC is (as that would reveal the level of the spell that evil wizard is casting).

The evil wizard can counterspell the player's counterspell because it's totally okay to take a reaction on your own turn (evil wizard is reacting to the player's reacting to the evil wizard's casting). And then another player can counterspell the evil wizard's counterspell so that the first player's counterspell still works.

Bardo.

[mer.c]

There's no way to tell what someone else is casting.

Unless this is stated somewhere in the rules*, this sounds like DM fiat. Which is fine – 5e is built with fewer rules, and more DM fiat is one of aims and one of the enablers of that system. But this makes it sound like a rule when it isn't.

*Which it may be. In which case my apologies and please ignore me. :)

[JoeJ]

I don't allow any way to know what spell is being cast before it goes off because that disadvantages illusionists more than I want to. In combat, if an enemy is casting a spell you should just assume that it's not going to be good for your side.

To be fair, though, NPCs also shouldn't know what a PC is casting. If there's any possibility that an NPC might use Counterspell, have the PC just say that they're casting something and give you a second to decide whether or not the NPC casts Counterspell before they reveal what the spell is.

[mer.c]

I don't allow any way to know what spell is being cast before it goes off because that disadvantages illusionists more than I want to.

But surely any illusionist worth their salt would be able to deceive an onlooker, eh? :smalltongue:

[JoeJ]

But surely any illusionist worth their salt would be able to deceive an onlooker, eh? :smalltongue:

Possibly, but I don't see any benefit to adding another point of failure to spells that encourage the kind of creative out-of-the-box thinking I enjoy seeing in my game.

[eastmabl]

But surely any illusionist worth their salt would be able to deceive an onlooker, eh? :smalltongue:

Does an illusionist have to be proficient in Deception in order to cast spells effectively? I hope not - especially considering that you don't have that as an option from the class itself.

[mer.c]

Looking back, I could have been a lot clearer that the Illusionist comment was tongue-in-cheek. :smalltongue: just doesn't do it.

[CantigThimble]

Hrmm, I suppose if you were making it possible for spellcasters to recognize spells exactly or by school then illusion spells would need to look like the kind of spell they're replicating. Usually conjuration. Even spell level could easily give away the illusion. If someone summons a wall of iron using silent image, you'll see that it's a really low level spell and couldn't possibly be real.

[theMycon]

Allow Advantage if the character knows it.
I have no idea why this did not occur to me until I read it. Thank you.

(Not to imply I dislike your other ideas, I just implement 'em one at a time so my group doesn't get confused.)

[CantigThimble]

I have no idea why this did not occur to me until I read it. Thank you.

(Not to imply I dislike your other ideas, I just implement 'em one at a time so my group doesn't get confused.)

Wait, if you give them advantage won't they realize it's on their spell list?

[Segev]

I can see the issue with spells that rely on deception as to their nature. I would probably handle those by being more descriptive than denotative: "He's conjuring a lion" instead of "He's casting major image," or "He's casting summon nature's ally III," for example. (I may have the 5e summoning spell name wrong, but hopefully you get the point.)

[bardo]

Unless this is stated somewhere in the rules*, this sounds like DM fiat. Which is fine – 5e is built with fewer rules, and more DM fiat is one of aims and one of the enablers of that system. But this makes it sound like a rule when it isn't.

*Which it may be. In which case my apologies and please ignore me. :)


Looking back, I could have been a lot clearer that the Illusionist comment was tongue-in-cheek. :smalltongue: just doesn't do it.

Cheeky or not, here's the thing. The rule books aren't going to list every single thing a character can't do. Such a list would be impossibly long. The rule books list what characters can do. The absence of mechanics to find out what someone else is casting is enough to support my claim that there's no way to tell what someone else is casting, or at the very least, that there's no check to tell what someone else is casting. The fact previous editions had such mechanics, and 5e doesn't, even suggests it was removed on purpose.

There are also no mechanics for jumping on one leg. Does that mean my character can't jump on one leg? No. Characters are people like you and me, and can do anything you and I can do. It probably says so in the rule books somewhere.

In a world where it is possible to tell what someone else is casting by looking at them, surely all casters will be trained from infancy in covering their mouths and hiding their hands from opponents. Not to mention techniques for fooling someone into thinking you're casting a conjuring spell when you're casting an illusion. It gets very complex. It's not in D&D 5e which tries to be a simple system. Any group that wants to add it is, of course, welcome to do so.

Bardo.

[Segev]

In a world where it is possible to tell what someone else is casting by looking at them, surely all casters will be trained from infancy in covering their mouths and hiding their hands from opponents. Not to mention techniques for fooling someone into thinking you're casting a conjuring spell when you're casting an illusion. It gets very complex. It's not in D&D 5e which tries to be a simple system. Any group that wants to add it is, of course, welcome to do so.

Bardo.

Which is why my proposal is not that the caster tells what he's doing by reading his hand gestures and lips, but by seeing the effect, and reacting to it before the effect can do anything harmful.


Picture an enemy caster hurling a lightning bolt. The party mage sees electricity crackle and form into a bolt, and immediately casts counterspell, causing the bolt to fizzle less than a foot from the enemy caster. Or the enemy mage gestures and calls out, and a lion appears. Before the lion is even fully formed, the PC uses counterspell, causing it to un-form right away.

[MaxWilson]

Yes.

You've got a couple of ways of handling this.

1) Tell the player what you're casting.
2) Tell the player the level of the spell your casting only.
3) Tell the player either of the above only if it's a spell he knows.
3a) Allow an Arcana or Religion check to see if he knows/has heard of the spell.
4) Never tell the player anything about what you're casting.

Pick your poison, but stick to it.

As written, I take the implication that option (4) is intended; nothing in the spell description says anything about identifying the spell to be Counterspelled, only that a spell is being cast, but that's only my opinion (and I'm a fairly harsh GM).

In my last campaign I did (1) (for both PCs and NPCs/monsters), but having experienced the implications I'm thinking it might be more interesting to move to (4). I'll consult with my players but I'd like to make the switch. I expect them to try to negotiate it something in between, e.g. (3) instead of (4).


Which is why my proposal is not that the caster tells what he's doing by reading his hand gestures and lips, but by seeing the effect, and reacting to it before the effect can do anything harmful.

Picture an enemy caster hurling a lightning bolt. The party mage sees electricity crackle and form into a bolt, and immediately casts counterspell, causing the bolt to fizzle less than a foot from the enemy caster. Or the enemy mage gestures and calls out, and a lion appears. Before the lion is even fully formed, the PC uses counterspell, causing it to un-form right away.

Yep, that's exactly how I did it, with the additional caveat that everyone can feel on their innate arcane sensors the magical energy that is forming even before it manifests. It's definitely a workable way to play; it just leads to less uncertainty during combat than other options.

[bardo]

Which is why my proposal is not that the caster tells what he's doing by reading his hand gestures and lips, but by seeing the effect, and reacting to it before the effect can do anything harmful.

What about spells like Darkvision, Detect *, See Invisibility, Sending, Divination, or Tongues that have no effect outside the caster? What about Metamagic like Quickened Spell and Subtle Spell? I'm just curious to see you build up your idea into an encompassing mechanics. For my games I'm fine with RAW's you can tell that they are casting something but you can't tell what.

Bardo.

[Segev]

What about spells like Darkvision, Detect *, See Invisibility, Sending, Divination, or Tongues that have no effect outside the caster? What about Metamagic like Quickened Spell and Subtle Spell? I'm just curious to see you build up your idea into an encompassing mechanics. For my games I'm fine with RAW's you can tell that they are casting something but you can't tell what.

Bardo.

If there's no visible effect of the spell, I'd probably just tell the player that. "The mage casts something; you can't see any visible effect." I may or may not resort to the "Arcana Skill Check" at that point, if the player really wants.


The RAW would probably work, too, if that's really what they are. (I'm sorry if I sound skeptical, but I've seen too many claims of what the RAW "definitely are" in 5e, when they either are clearly quite the opposite, to me, or are vague enough that the "definite" interpretation requires entire sentences to be inserted to make it so.)

Regardless, 5e really is meant not to be run with the RAW as such a huge concern.

So for me, I like the idea of giving the player more info about what he's countering, but can see just "he's casting; do you counter?" being played, too.

[MaxWilson]

What about spells like Darkvision, Detect *, See Invisibility, Sending, Divination, or Tongues that have no effect outside the caster? What about Metamagic like Quickened Spell and Subtle Spell? I'm just curious to see you build up your idea into an encompassing mechanics. For my games I'm fine with RAW's you can tell that they are casting something but you can't tell what.

Bardo.

My rule that I've used up till now has been "if there are no visible effects after casting, there are no visible effects while casting."

[Addaran]

What about spells like Darkvision, Detect *, See Invisibility, Sending, Divination, or Tongues that have no effect outside the caster? What about Metamagic like Quickened Spell and Subtle Spell? I'm just curious to see you build up your idea into an encompassing mechanics. For my games I'm fine with RAW's you can tell that they are casting something but you can't tell what.

Bardo.

Doesn't subtle state that the others won't notice you're casting a spell? (AFB) If not, well that's pretty much what i'd rule.
Quickened is mostly used to break action economy, so the counterspeller is probably still aware. If the quickener wants to do it quickly without possibility of counter, i'd let it but that would be the effect of the quicken (bypass readied action/counterspell) so he wouldn't be able to cast a second spell/attack.

For spell that affects the caster, you can just say he's targetting himself with a spell, do you counter? Harder to know the effect then more visual spells, so you have to guess if he's casting a buff, a heal, teleportion, utility, etc.

[theMycon]

Wait, if you give them advantage won't they realize it's on their spell list?

Yes, but I seriously doubt that would affect their decision to counterspell. It says "it's one the 17(?) spells & cantrips I'm familiar with", which really isn't much more information that "a 15 didn't make it so it's a spell of 3rd level or above", especially given how little time to think it over I give them.


Picture an enemy caster hurling a lightning bolt. The party mage sees electricity crackle and form into a bolt, and immediately casts counterspell, causing the bolt to fizzle less than a foot from the enemy caster.

In this case, "the enemy pulls out a glass rod and a silk cloth and starts to rub it. The cloth wrinkles with static and suddenly a bolt of lightning shoots out."
I'm sure there's a less dirty way to phrase it, but a whole lot of material components are not-so-subtle jokes that suggest the somatic components, and that someone who knows the joke spell should be able to guess the general effect.

[Captbrannigan]

You guys might want to read the chapter on spellcasting.

Casting Time
Higher level spells by default do not take longer. Individual spells have casting times to balance their use in and out of combat.

Verbal Components
You can't whisper them or slip them into a sentence. They are LOUD, OBVIOUSLY magical incantations. A "particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance." This is a balanced cost to using these spells, people in hearing range are alerted. If you can't provide the intonation necessary, you can't cast the spell.

Somatic Components
There are no rules for applying Sleight of Hand to hide these, so again - Obviously Magical. You're tracing out an intricate pattern, or performing a series of stances and gestures. You are allowed to handle material components while performing these actions. If you can't provide the gestures necessary, you can't cast the spell.

Material
If it has a cost, you can't use your focus so you have to have a free hand. This doesn't apply to very many spells, but notably Forcecage can't be cast with a staff and shield equipped.


Think about settings like the Cthulu mythos, where dark rituals cause loud winds and flashes of lights, mysterious chimes on the edge of hearing, thunder with no clouds in the sky. Not only are the rituals obvious, but failing to perform them accurately incurs the wrath of those called upon for aid. 5e isn't that extreme, but magic is a known thing that is Obvious when used and spells do not function when missing components. If you want to hide that, you have to be a Sorcerer and burn your points on Subtle spells.

S & V components are described as "specific" and "intricate." There is a side note about arcane and divine magic, and the flavor of those implies they would have their own S & V components as appropriate. The most reasonable thing is to treat each spell list as having it's own style of components, but they are uniform across those casters. A cleric casting mage armor looks/sounds different than a wizard casting it, but all clerics look the same (though they may be calling upon different deities).

That said, 5e is about simplicity and getting on with things. Just tell them what the enemy is casting.

[Vogonjeltz]

I'm a relatively new DM running my first campaign. My players are currently level 4, with my wizard planning on picking up counterspell as soon as he reaches level 5. We had a recent discussion about how much he as a wizard could pick up and tell from the enemy casters hand motions before he casts counterspell, and that in several instances he should know the spell the enemy is casting if it's a spell he's familiar with to know whether he wants to counterspell it or not. I have a few concerns with this.

1. Are the hand motions for a spell the exact same from caster to caster? Do all wizards cast the same spell the exact same way. If all wizards cast the spell the same way, is it cast the same between wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks?

2. You have to counterspell before the enemy caster gets the full spell off, so if you wait until the full hand motions complete, the spell is off, and you can't counter it. Then how varied are the hand motions, if you need to cast the counterspell before it goes off, you may only see the first half of the hand motions before you need to make that split second decision, would the beginning hand motions for one spell be exactly the same for another spell, with only the ending hand motions be different?

3. Could 2 spells have the exact same hand motions with different wording. If the caster is casting as a whisper, you would just see the hand motions and not realize the differences in the varied words.

4. Battles can be fairly fast and intense, with everything that is going on, with the wizard 50ft+ back, with the rogue and barbarian in melee with the caster, how much of the hand motions can the wizard see in the heat of battle in that 1-2second cast time, with other players and objects in the way. Perception check?

5. Am I way overthinking things?

How do other DMs handle counterspell, in regards to information the player might get, if any, before the enemy gets the spell off.

1. Maybe. Look to spell descriptions, they sometimes (re: Burning Hands) tell you what gestures are needed, sometimes it's potentially free-form. The implication of the Components description on phb 203 is that it's not what you say or do so much as how you go about it. If the person who could counterspell knew the same spell as was being cast, I might tell them that the enemy is casting something suspiciously like spell X that they also know. If an enemy was casting the same spell again, I might let the player know if they were looking for it. (Like, if they ask if it looks like the same spell as before).

2. Yes, typically I'd say the player/monster has to choose to counterspell before they know what the spell being cast is. So, if I knew a PC had counterspell (or any reactive ability that could be used before a spell is cast), I'd just say the NPC is casting a spell (assuming it wasn't a subtle, and thus undetectable, spell).

3. Maybe.

4. Maybe.

5. I think you're thinking things through to come to a conclusion you feel that you can logically support if questioned on it. That's a good practice.

[Pex]

Wait, if you give them advantage won't they realize it's on their spell list?

Advantage is for knowing it. Proficiency, if not proficient already, is if it's on the spell list. It's justified because being on the spell list and possibly knowing it is the act of recognizing the gestures and incantation as something familiar. It's your basic knowledge just by the incidence of being a particular spellcasting class. The roll is to determine whether or not you can figure out the exact spell.

Edit: Precisely because every spellcaster might cast the same spell a little differently is why there's a roll and not automatic knowledge even if you know the spell yourself.

[CantigThimble]

Advantage is for knowing it. Proficiency, if not proficient already, is if it's on the spell list. It's justified because being on the spell list and possibly knowing it is the act of recognizing the gestures and incantation as something familiar. It's your basic knowledge just by the incidence of being a particular spellcasting class. The roll is to determine whether or not you can figure out the exact spell.

The player was just told to roll 2 dice rather than 1. Presumably they know this rule or have done this enough to know that they get advantage when their character knows the spell. They now have a lot more information even when they botch the roll if they know their own spell list well.

[SharkForce]

Somatic Components
There are no rules for applying Sleight of Hand to hide these, so again - Obviously Magical. You're tracing out an intricate pattern, or performing a series of stances and gestures. You are allowed to handle material components while performing these actions. If you can't provide the gestures necessary, you can't cast the spell.


this is probably only semi-official at best, but i seem to recall there being rules for concealing somatic components in whichever AL season is set in the city that hates wizards because reasons.

[Tanarii]

The rules don't provide any mechanic for identifying which spell specifically is being cast, nor suggest it is possible to do so. If you want that, you have to house-rule it.

[Pex]

The player was just told to roll 2 dice rather than 1. Presumably they know this rule or have done this enough to know that they get advantage when their character knows the spell. They now have a lot more information even when they botch the roll if they know their own spell list well.

Intended. Basic spellcaster knowledge. You are familiar with the patterns of gestures and incantations that make up the spells you can potentially cast. That's knowing the alphabet and phonic sounds. The roll is figuring out the combinations used for a particular spell - spelling a word or sentence.

[Cybren]

I find it interesting that people thought letting an arcana check to identify the spell being cast makes counterspell weaker. I'd certainly not want to counter a bad spell, and I don't know how more information makes it worse.

By default you obviously have to tell them the components being used, so if the player wants to counter a spell with hand gestures and an piece of metal involved in the casting that's up to them. Telling them the specific spell, or the school, or the level, or any other info is up to you. Maybe all spell casters can identify spells on their list, or their spells known. Maybe magic is individual, that is a setting dependent question.

It's ambiguous if the verbal/somatic components are the same from caster to caster, but material ones are, and the specific combination of components tends to be as well (barring subtle spell, which has none, but you can't counter a subtle spell since you don't notice it being cast at all)

[Segev]

I find it interesting that people thought letting an arcana check to identify the spell being cast makes counterspell weaker. I'd certainly not want to counter a bad spell, and I don't know how more information makes it worse.If they're like me, they were operating under the (apparently false) assumption that the default was knowing what the spell was automatically, before choosing to counterspell it. So adding a skill check to identify made it so you had a chance of not being able to tell what it was, rather than automatically knowing.

[joaber]

you played MTG?

Think like that, all the spells go first to a pile. In D&D is the wave, anyone with 3rd lvl spell know the wave good enought to see what is comming. You can imagine counterspell dissipating one spell already casted in the first seconds. Create the excuse that you want, but please, don't put useless rules to encumber what works fine and is balanced.

[Tanarii]

but material ones are,
From what I've seen, the majority of players use a focus instead of M components or a Compinent Pouch. Except for Rangers, ATs and EKs, who can't use a focus. Of course, for NPCs this is up to the DM.