Counterspelling houserules/alternatives

[Mendicant]

Counterspell in 3.x is generally kind of crappy, which is a shame because it's such a fundamental part of cool wizard duels in a lot of fiction. Are there good homebrew alternatives out there that make the base subsystem more interesting and effective? I'm not really looking for specialized builds here--I'd prefer if it was a useful, low-investment part of every caster's toolbox.

[Zaq]

Honestly, the low-investment method is just making sure you have dispel magic on tap. Even if you don’t do the whole readied action thing, “I use my magic to undo your magic” is still pretty close to the feel you seem to want.

[Biggus]

The spell Battlemagic Perception lasts 10mins/ level, and allows you to CS once as a free action. There's also Duelward which is similar, but as that only 1 round per level it's of limited use.

A Ring of Spell-Battle likewise functions once per day, and can allow you to change the target instead of counterspelling if you prefer.

The epic feat Epic Counterspell allows you to counterspell any nunber of times a round as a free action.

Those are the only ways in 3.5 I know of to make counterspelling worthwhile: I don't know PF as well, so there may be some in there I don't know about.

[Selion]

Counterspell in 3.x is generally kind of crappy, which is a shame because it's such a fundamental part of cool wizard duels in a lot of fiction. Are there good homebrew alternatives out there that make the base subsystem more interesting and effective? I'm not really looking for specialized builds here--I'd prefer if it was a useful, low-investment part of every caster's toolbox.

Yes, i had the same concerns, but then i realized that there are ways to overcome this lack of rules with proper builds.
Without going in the extreme specialization, there are some items which could help even if you don't invest in counterspelling feats:

Ring of counterspells: Cheap and useful in your whole adventuring career
https://www.aonprd.com/MagicRingsDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Ring%20of%20Count erspells

Headband of counterspelling: It's just once a day, but gives you exactly what you need. You may work with your DM to increase uses per day with custom magic item creation rules.
https://www.aonprd.com/MagicWondrousDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Headband%20of% 20Counterspelling

Ring of arcane mastery (just for magi): a minor spell turning option available early.
https://www.aonprd.com/MagicRingsDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Ring%20of%20Arcan e%20Mastery

Remember even passive magic defences, like the spells: ward shield, spell resistance, lesser globe of invulnerability
Any other class can use a single level DIP in arcanist to qualify for the counterspell exploit.

On the other side, there are plenty of feats to conceal your casting and make your spells harder to identify (and thus to counter), in particular i remember:
Spellsong (bards and skalds only) https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/spellsong/
Conceal spell https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/conceal-spell/
Spell bluff https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/spell-bluff/
(BTW seriously there are plenty of them, if you like spell duels)

If you are into house rules, just use the counterspell exploit 3 times/day as a feat, there are surely better ways, but heavy house rules usually bring unexpected consequences

[Biggus]

One thing that could help is if you changed the rule on readying an action so that it requires the same type of action as the action you're readying instead of always requiring a standard action, you could ready a swift action to counterspell and still have your standard action free to use. It'd require investing in a Circlet of Rapid Casting or Metamagic Rod of Quicken, but they're hardly items which are useless if you don't need to counterspell.

More generally, I think the main problem with counterspelling is that it requires you to ready a standard action to do it, unless you have one of the spells, items or feats listed above. You could simply rule that you can counterspell as an immediate action once per round as standard; although that would likely lead to a LOT of counterspelling happening. Perhaps creating a single feat which allowed you to do that would make it generally available but still require a small investment.

[ericgrau]

If you want it to be a tool for every mage, give improved counterspell for free and you're done. Really, it's that easy. It still usually will not be worth it for a PC mage to counterspell a weaker mage, but it will be worth it for him to trade actions with a stronger mage. Simply ready action to counterspell, BBEG/LBEG mage neutralized. That's really powerful already, albeit only when fighting a BBEG/LBEG mage. If the enemy casts a spell that's too high level for the party mage to counter or the party mage doesn't have the right school, then the party mage can still attempt to counterspell with a dispel magic so he doesn't waste his turn. Not having the right school can be a pain in the butt so you might consider removing that requirement as well.

It is also sometimes worth it to counterspell a weaker mage when the party is trying to avoid risk. True, the PC mage could cast a stronger spell than what the enemy could cast instead, but this reduces the luck factor and provides a safe choice. For example if only the enemy mage is left. And/or the PC mage already used BFC to neutralize or weaken other enemies. Then the PC mage can ready action to counterspell and change a likely win with low hurt to the party into a certain win with no hurt to the party.

5e has immediate action counterspells and it leads to it being a super powerful ability with silly huge (but dull) counterspell wars where basically whoever has the most mages wins. It still works, but I wouldn't go as far as using immediate actions. Simply using improved counterspell has the added advantage of not leading to back and forth counterspell wars where few mages can actually cast anything.

Besides what Selion mentioned, other tactics include readied actions to deal damage (by the mage or not a mage), silence (enemy targeted, ally targeted and area options), and other spells that work against magic.

[Selion]

Besides what Selion mentioned, other tactics include readied actions to deal damage (by the mage or not a mage), silence (enemy targeted, ally targeted and area options), and other spells that work against magic.

Yep, a readied damage spell in particular is so disruptive that it's almost cheating:
A fireball at level 10 does 17.5 average damage if the reflex save is successful, so reading a fireball on the condition of an enemy cast force a concentration check of 27 + spell level
A level 15 wizard with +8 int modifier has +23 on the concentration check, meaning he needs a roll of 12 to cast a level 8 spell, 11 to cast level 7 and so on.
You basically have used a 3rd level slot, dealt damage and halved the magic capabilities of a foe which is 5 levels higher than you. If you had used instead a higher slot, like a empowered fireball, you'd probably have shut down completely his spellcasting. Gz.
(quickened spells are a way to circumvent this strategy, but i have the feeling something is wrong in these rules.)

[ericgrau]

Yep, a readied damage spell in particular is so disruptive that it's almost cheating:
A fireball at level 10 does 17.5 average damage if the reflex save is successful, so reading a fireball on the condition of an enemy cast force a concentration check of 27 + spell level
A level 15 wizard with +8 int modifier has +23 on the concentration check, meaning he needs a roll of 12 to cast a level 8 spell, 11 to cast level 7 and so on.
You basically have used a 3rd level slot, dealt damage and halved the magic capabilities of a foe which is 5 levels higher than you. If you had used instead a higher slot, like a empowered fireball, you'd probably have shut down completely his spellcasting. Gz.
(quickened spells are a way to circumvent this strategy, but i have the feeling something is wrong in this rules.)
Or empowered magic missile for DC 36 + spell level, also shutting him down completely using a 3rd level spell. Plus it makes for reliable backup damage for 100 other special purposes too. Or sleet storm is a weather effect to disrupt casting plus BFC multiple foes at the same time. i.e., there are plenty of ways using spells you might have already.

Whatever houserules you pick, try to make counterspelling good enough to be a nice reliable and viable option instead of simply dealing damage. Maybe you already burnt your damage spells and you want to be able to use another spell slot instead. Maybe you're not sure if the enemy is resistant to the type of damage you have and you want to be more sure you actually counter him. But likewise don't make counterspelling so overpowered that it's the only thing anyone every does in a mage fight. That's boring. So it also shouldn't be always strictly better than dealing damage or casting silence or etc. That's why I'm wary about allowing it as immediate actions, because when 5e does that every mage vs mage fight involves a dull counterspell war. Plus managing to get a couple spells past counterspell via one side having more resources or etc. Don't forget 3.5e already has 100 interesting ways to combat mages. You want to add another way to the mix to make things even more interesting. Not make all the other ways obsolete and only have 1 dull option left.

I do like 5e btw and it's a good compromise between options and ease of play. Still my group missed the huge multitude of choices 3.x has. We're doing a 3.5 campaign now. Later we might do either.

[Biggus]

5e has immediate action counterspells and it leads to it being a super powerful ability with silly huge (but dull) counterspell wars where basically whoever has the most mages wins. It still works, but I wouldn't go as far as using immediate actions. Simply using improved counterspell has the added advantage of not leading to back and forth counterspell wars where few mages can actually cast anything.


Yeah, I was a bit concerned something like that might result. Doesn't sound particularly fun.

What about allowing counterspelling as a swift action, which could be readied instead of taking your actual swift action for the round? Or a move action for that matter? That way there'd still be a cost to readying an action (as you'd waste a swift or move action if you didn't have to counterspell) but you would be giving up your primary spellcasting every round.

[ericgrau]

Yeah, I was a bit concerned something like that might result. Doesn't sound particularly fun.

What about allowing counterspelling as a swift action, which could be readied instead of taking your actual swift action for the round? Or a move action for that matter? That way there'd still be a cost to readying an action (as you'd waste a swift or move action if you didn't have to counterspell) but you would be giving up your primary spellcasting every round.

At low level you don't have much else to use your swift for and that's basically the same as immediate action counterspells. Around level 5-7 and up it depends how many splats your group uses. If everyone both has and greatly uses spell compendium then there are a bunch of nice swift action spells. So the cost is not popping your swift for something else like a bit of mobility or other minor buff. That's an actual decision so it kind of works, though it's not that high of a cost. Once you determine the enemy is a mage by round 2 counterspelling may still often (but not always) be the automatic choice. Over other options like readied actions to deal damage and silence. I think it kind of works, kind of doesn't. It could work ok. As long as everyone at least has enough experience to select swift action spells from spell compendium. You also need to explain to players that they can't ready their swift action for other things. And they need to understand readied actions to disrupt casting with damage, which still might be a major choice some of the time. And maybe other choices like silence or weather spells, perhaps to lock down the mage immediately after counterspelling. And to keep things interesting tactically. So... yeah, with a ton of player knowledge or explanation to players swift action counterspells may work.

The other thing is that enemies may want to do the same to PCs. And then you ready counter spells for that, and then whoever has the most mages wins and locks down enemy mages. Perhaps using their few remaining spells on silence or etc. Most often the PCs will have the most mages, meaning battles against mages could be a bit too easy and might need to be ramped up. But too much and the entire party might be in low HP after a single fireball or etc. breaks through. For example if the spell level is too high. So... even if you have all that player knowledge to make it work it can still get dull, or else swingy enough (all or nothing-ish) to risk a TPK.

In short it wouldn't suck, but with all that time explaining to players and the semi-mess that still happens it might not be great. Maybe for a mage heavy campaign. Otherwise I'm still in favor of a more minor but still useful approach.

[Selion]

Yeah, I was a bit concerned something like that might result. Doesn't sound particularly fun.

What about allowing counterspelling as a swift action, which could be readied instead of taking your actual swift action for the round? Or a move action for that matter? That way there'd still be a cost to readying an action (as you'd waste a swift or move action if you didn't have to counterspell) but you would be giving up your primary spellcasting every round.

I think a better call would be just allowing counterspelling as an immediate action a few times per day, thing already possible within the rules, you just need to expand class features/items to every class at the cost of some feat tax. I think it's the more economic way to rule the issue without breaking the game.

It's sad that a wargame like warhammer has better general rules regarding magic than a RPG, in warhammer the mere presence of enemy casters reduce your ability to cast spells. A similar approach could be introducing a passive aura around spellcasters, depending on CL, that induces concentration checks on enemies. Like 6 + CL + casting ability score DC concentration check, to be increased of +2 for every other enemy caster in the area.

[DarkSoul]

Counterspell in 3.x is generally kind of crappy, which is a shame because it's such a fundamental part of cool wizard duels in a lot of fiction. Are there good homebrew alternatives out there that make the base subsystem more interesting and effective? I'm not really looking for specialized builds here--I'd prefer if it was a useful, low-investment part of every caster's toolbox.What about making the various counterspelling feats (improved, reactive, etc.) Wizard bonus feats? I don't feel that every arcane caster should just be naturally good at it, simply because they're already naturally good at pretty much every other part of the game.

[Biggus]

At low level you don't have much else to use your swift for and that's basically the same as immediate action counterspells. Around level 5-7 and up it depends how many splats your group uses. If everyone both has and greatly uses spell compendium then there are a bunch of nice swift action spells. So the cost is not popping your swift for something else like a bit of mobility or other minor buff. That's an actual decision so it kind of works, though it's not that high of a cost. Once you determine the enemy is a mage by round 2 counterspelling may still often (but not always) be the automatic choice. Over other options like readied actions to deal damage and silence. I think it kind of works, kind of doesn't. It could work ok. As long as everyone at least has enough experience to select swift action spells from spell compendium. You also need to explain to players that they can't ready their swift action for other things. And they need to understand readied actions to disrupt casting with damage, which still might be a major choice some of the time. And maybe other choices like silence or weather spells, perhaps to lock down the mage immediately after counterspelling. And to keep things interesting tactically. So... yeah, with a ton of player knowledge or explanation to players swift action counterspells may work.

The other thing is that enemies may want to do the same to PCs. And then you ready counter spells for that, and then whoever has the most mages wins and locks down enemy mages. Perhaps using their few remaining spells on silence or etc. Most often the PCs will have the most mages, meaning battles against mages could be a bit too easy and might need to be ramped up. But too much and the entire party might be in low HP after a single fireball or etc. breaks through. For example if the spell level is too high. So... even if you have all that player knowledge to make it work it can still get dull, or else swingy enough (all or nothing-ish) to risk a TPK.

In short it wouldn't suck, but with all that time explaining to players and the semi-mess that still happens it might not be great. Maybe for a mage heavy campaign. Otherwise I'm still in favor of a more minor but still useful approach.

All good points, thank you. It had occurred to me that at low levels you don't have much else to use your swift actions for, but by 3rd level spells there are some decent swift action ones in the SpC.

Still just brainstorming ideas...what about allowing use of the Reactive Counterspell feat to all casters? You lose your next turn that way so the cost is substantial, but you don't just waste your action readying for nothing if you don't need to counterspell.

[Mendicant]

All good points, thank you. It had occurred to me that at low levels you don't have much else to use your swift actions for, but by 3rd level spells there are some decent swift action ones in the SpC.

Still just brainstorming ideas...what about allowing use of the Reactive Counterspell feat to all casters? You lose your next turn that way so the cost is substantial, but you don't just waste your action readying for nothing if you don't need to counterspell.

That's the sort of thing I'm moving towards. You identify the spell in the moment and then make the decision about whether to counterspell. I'm thinking immediate action plus the action necessary to cast, so it's still costly but you're usually left with a move action when your turn comes up.

[Biggus]

That's the sort of thing I'm moving towards. You identify the spell in the moment and then make the decision about whether to counterspell. I'm thinking immediate action plus the action necessary to cast, so it's still costly but you're usually left with a move action when your turn comes up.

Yes, I thought losing your entire next turn is pretty severe, I'd wondered about it just using your next standard action instead. What's your thinking for it using an immediate action as well?

[False God]

Personally, I'd just make it a reaction with some kind of feat tax. My current DM requires Combat Casting. You could pick Improved Counterspell or make up a new feat if you wanted. In her game it lets me counterspell as a reaction/immediate action 1/round as long as I have a Dispel Magic prepared. I still have to identify the spell with a Spellcraft check and I still have to make a CL check.

It works out pretty well. She rolls randomly if any caster she throws at us has the feat and has the correct spells, and honestly there are rarely wizard fights.

[Ramza00]

A short handbook of many of the 3.5 ways to optimize Dispel and Counterspell.

https://coboard.fandom.com/wiki/Counterspelling_%26_Dispelling

[Ramza00]

I want to point out how good Battlemagic Perception is from an action vs reaction standpoint. Action vs Reaction wins D&D for the game is a kind of form of rocket tag.

Battlemagic Perception (Cleric 3, Wizard+Sorc 3, Spellthief 3) allows you to counterspell as a free action for the spell duration. Its duration is 10 mins per caster level. Since it is only a 3rd level spell it can be extend with a rod of extend lesser for 3,000 gp 3 times a day so effectively you are paying 1,000 gp to make the duration 20 mins per level, or if you use 3 castings of Battlemagic Perception a day + Rod of Extend Lesser we are talking 1 hour per caster level a day.

Now using Battlemagic Perception as a counterspell resets the spell duration via ending the spell. You now must use an action to cast a new battlemagic perception putting it up again if you want to dispel as a free actin. But the point is it is so cheap and easy to have Battlemagic Perception up to prevent bad spells from killing you or removing buffs, for 5,500 gp (Rod of Extend Lesser, Pearl of Power 3rd that you or a party member crafted with Craft Wondrous Item) you are safe and wasted the actions of something you are trying to kill while not wasting your own actions doing the protective counterspelling to save your bacon.

Since it is a divination you can spontaneously cast it if you do Wizard 5 / Spontaneous Divination substitution option, or if you are a Cleric there are several domains that give Dispel Magic 3 as a Domain Spell and with Spontaneous Domain Cleric Substitution instead of Spontaneous Healing / Inflict you can now swap your spells as free options. My point here is that it is quite easy to get the right amount of Battlemagic Perception and Dispel Magic Ratios if you can use magic items and can also swap your normal prepared spells to the right spell as you need them.

Now Dispel Magic is almost an automatic win if you get the Inquisition Domain (via Cleric, Church Inquisitor, or the Feat Planar Touchstone-Catalogues of Enlightenment which allows you a Domain Power of the Inquisition Domain) and the 1000 gp item (500 if you craft it) Dispelling Cord. These two things together give you a +6 bonus to your dispel check for very little investment.

------

All of this stuff I said before does not slow you down. You can still use your normal swift, move, standard actions to buff, or battlefield control, or polymorph, or blast, or save or suck / die. It is just using resources of the total amount of spells you have per day, and your wealth by level to give you free action abilities in conjunction with your normal spells and actions that actually kill the enemy. This is a pure defensive strategy while not subtracting anything from your offense.

Oh yeah there are many other ways you can also do similar things such as the Divine Defiance Counterspell Feat. Furthermore this type of build combos real well with Mystic Theurge if you do early entry. Cloistered Cleric 1 / Wizard 2/ Mystic Theurge 10 with Improved Sigil Krau is only 1 spell known level behind Wizard and 2 behind Cleric, and the Improved Sigil Krau boosts your Caster Level to your hit dice and also allows you to qualify for Divine Defiance.

[Madsamurai]

So I know that 3.5 and its successors are clunky in a lot of ways, but I feel that counterspelling is pretty worthless as a baseline for a pretty good reason. Imagine a world where everyone can counterspell as a reaction of some kind: that is without spending any standard actions. Any fight with an equal number of spell-casters on the two sides would just have absolutely no spells resolved as both would lock down the other. Worse, it would favor the higher-level caster which is usually an NPC.

While this does effect casters more than martials, which is good for balance, I don't think its good for fun.

Now, the current form of counterspelling is kinda useless without going splat-book diving. I think if I was to create a new system from scratch, I'd make it so that it's easier to reactivity counter a caster's highest level spells as compared to their lower level ones. The flavor justification is that it is easier to unweave a spell that a magic-user has just barely mastered vs one he is practiced in. This would mean that when wizards fight they end up slinging lower level spells but they still get to participate.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Ever look into Arcana Evolved?

It's a rules system Monte Cook made off of the 3.5 rules. I think it handles spellcasting in most regards better than 3E and PF, and its counterspelling system seems a lot more useful, at least if you spend a feat on "Brandish Magical Might."

BMM is available to any spellcaster of CL 3+, and gives numerous benefits, including the ability to counterspell without losing any spell slots doing so. You ready to counterspell, and make an opposed Caster Power check (CL check w/ your casting ability mod added as well) with the caster. You win, they lose the spell. You lose, it goes off normally, but either way it costs you no spell slots, just the readied action. You do have to have the spell on your the spell list, basically (a bit more system-specific than that, but that's how I'd translate it to 3E/PF).