PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Alternate Counterspell



Segev
2020-05-08, 11:07 AM
There's a thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?611768-Whts-up-with-all-the-hate-on-counterspell-and-dispel-magic) on counterspell and why it's in a weird place/disliked by players in the 5e forum.

One of the points raised was that it feels very game-y and like a weird bluff game between DM and player that results in a forced change to the normal flow of the game. Said normal flow being that a spellcaster, on his turn, says, "I cast [spell]!"

Counterspell, by the rules, is supposed to go off when you recognize that a spell is being cast, but before you have any means of telling what spell it is. (Xanathar's Guide to Everything gives rules for identifying a spell being cast; it consumes your Reaction, making it possible to ID the spell or to cast counterspell, but not both.) This means that the flow, when counterspell is involved, needs to be "I start casting, do you do anything about it?" "No/I cast counterspell," "Okay, then the spell is [spell], and it goes off/is countered."

There's some minigame here over whether the original caster is baiting a counterspell with a cantrip, or the spell is worth countering, or whether anybody has a counterspell to counter the first counterspell. But the disruption to the normal flow of gameplay and the more cerebral, poker-like and action-deficit-based battle feels "off" from the kind of dramatic beam-o-war that I believe counterspell is meant to evoke. Not that a game of wits is not cool and very wizardly, but I just don't think it's quite "right" here.

Therefore, I propose this complete rewrite of counterspell. It is designed to work with the normal game flow, allowing people to just announce what spell they're casting and the counterspeller to operate on that knowledge, and then turning it into a bidding war of spell slots between the caster and counterspeller, rather than a game of bluffing and/or hoping you have more spellcasters on your side than he does on his.


Counterspell
3rd-level abjuration
Casting time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a spell taking effect or a creature casting a spell within 60 feet of you
Range: 60 feet
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

When you see a creature casting a spell, or see a spell come into effect, within range, you use your own magic to counter the effect. When you do, you engage the other caster in a sort of magical tug-of-war. He may bolster his spell by spending a spell slot of the same level you used to cast this spell or higher. You may bolster your counterspell attempt likewise, using an additional spell slot of the same level he used to bolster his or higher. This back-and-forth of potentially-escalating minimum spell slots continues until one of you chooses not to - or cannot - expend a spell slot of the appropriate level.

If he chose not to bolster his spell, or you were the last one to expend a spell slot in this magical duel, the spell is countered and has no effect. If he was the last one to expend a spell slot in this magical duel, his spell takes effect normally.

This spell cannot be used to counter another counterspell.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell from a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the minimum level spell slot the other caster must use to bolster his spell matches the spell slot you used.

Doug Lampert
2020-05-08, 11:47 AM
1) Is it intended that the counterspeller and original caster both know what level slot they need? That would seem the clear intent, but isn't stated.

2) Does a counterspell need to be at the level of the spell being countered? Again, that feels like the intent, but the way it's written I think you could counter a ninth with a third level slot, and your opponent would then need to bolster to try to get his spell through, having already wasted his ninth for the day.

Veldrenor
2020-05-08, 12:05 PM
Just want to be sure I understand the flow of this version of Counterspell.

The enemy casts a spell. Let's say Animate Objects, 5th level spell. Seeing this spell being cast, I expend a 3rd level slot to cast Counterspell. The original caster then has a choice: either lose the Animate Objects, or expend a spell slot of 3rd level or higher.

Let's say they want the Animate Objects to go through, so they expend another 5th level slot. You now have a choice: either the Animate Objects goes off, or you expend a spell slot of 5th level or higher to maintain the counter.

This process continues, back and forth, until someone either cannot expend a high enough spell slot or chooses not to. Do I have it right? If so, I have a few objections/questions:

1) The Abjurer's "Improved Abjuration" feature would no longer apply to Counterspell.
2) Partial casters could no longer effectively Counterspell full casters because the full casters always have more and more powerful slots to outbid the partials. Admittedly this only applies to one archetype of Fighter, Paladin, and Rogue each, but decreasing the number of possible players who can interact with the sort of spells you'd typically want to Counterspell makes all such spells stronger.
3) Enemies only have their 1 fight for the day, they're free to nova. PCs, however, have to conserve their resources. As a result, the party will almost always lose this bidding war.
4) How does this interact with creatures that have innate spellcasting rather than spell slots? If you Counterspell a Glabrezu's Dispel Magic, is it SOL or can it just shrug and use one of its at-will Dispel Magics as a 3rd level slot?

Segev
2020-05-08, 12:36 PM
Thanks for the replies! I'll try to clarify intent, and then ask for help with wording, because I know my wording needs work, here.

1) Is it intended that the counterspeller and original caster both know what level slot they need? That would seem the clear intent, but isn't stated.That is the intent, yes.


2) Does a counterspell need to be at the level of the spell being countered? Again, that feels like the intent, but the way it's written I think you could counter a ninth with a third level slot, and your opponent would then need to bolster to try to get his spell through, having already wasted his ninth for the day.The intent is that, if (as in Veldrenor's example in the quote below) Alice casts animate objects, Bob knows she's cast animate objects and that he needs a 5th level spell slot for his counterspell to work.

So, to repeat for clarity, Bob needs to cast counterspell from a 5th level spell slot to counter animate objects (a 5th level spell).


Just want to be sure I understand the flow of this version of Counterspell.

The enemy casts a spell. Let's say Animate Objects, 5th level spell. Seeing this spell being cast, I expend a 3rd level slot to cast Counterspell. The original caster then has a choice: either lose the Animate Objects, or expend a spell slot of 3rd level or higher.

Let's say they want the Animate Objects to go through, so they expend another 5th level slot. You now have a choice: either the Animate Objects goes off, or you expend a spell slot of 5th level or higher to maintain the counter.

This process continues, back and forth, until someone either cannot expend a high enough spell slot or chooses not to. Do I have it right?You're close.

Repeating myself a bit to make sure I make this as clear as possible:

Alice casts a 5th level spell, animate objects.
Bob gets to hear Alice say, "I cast animate objects," so he knows what spell she's cast, and probably knows what level it is. He casts counterspell using a 5th level spell slot, because he wants it to actually work (casting from a 3rd or 4th level spell slot would fail to counter the 5th level spell).
Alice senses the power opposing/quashing her spell, so she knows she needs to pour at least another 5th level spell slot into it. If she wants, she can push a higher-level spell slot in an effort to win the bidding war outright by making it more than Bob wants to spend.
Bob can reply with a spell slot of at least the level Alice used to bolster her animate objects against his counterspell, using a higher-level slot if he really wants to up the ante (or is out of ones of the appropriate level).
This continues until Bob or Alice give up; if Alice gives up, her spell is countered, and if Bob gives up, the objects are animated.

If Bob, seeing Alice cast animate objects, doesn't want to get into a bidding war and thinks he can browbeat her with too high a cost, he could use a 6th, 7th, 8th, or even 9th level spell slot to cast the counterspell in the first place, and then Alice would have to meet or beat that with her own spell slot.


At no point can Bob use a 3rd level spell slot to counterspell Alice's 5th level spell.

Did that clarify everything for you about my intent?




If so, I have a few objections/questions:

1) The Abjurer's "Improved Abjuration" feature would no longer apply to Counterspell.Hm. I need to look that one up. Does it only add to the roll for counterspelling things of higher spell slot? Or does it give power back to the counterspeller? I thought it was the latter.

2) Partial casters could no longer effectively Counterspell full casters because the full casters always have more and more powerful slots to outbid the partials. Admittedly this only applies to one archetype of Fighter, Paladin, and Rogue each, but decreasing the number of possible players who can interact with the sort of spells you'd typically want to Counterspell makes all such spells stronger.Can they really effectively counterspell even now? And SHOULD they be able to?

3) Enemies only have their 1 fight for the day, they're free to nova. PCs, however, have to conserve their resources. As a result, the party will almost always lose this bidding war.Potentially, yes, but it also means the enemies actually are at risk of running out of spell slots in the fight, rather than being able to nova entirely because the fight will be over before they actually use up all their spell slots (one way or another).

4) How does this interact with creatures that have innate spellcasting rather than spell slots? If you Counterspell a Glabrezu's Dispel Magic, is it SOL or can it just shrug and use one of its at-will Dispel Magics as a 3rd level slot?That's a good question that I hadn't considered. My knee-jerk response is that he's SOL, because he doesn't have spell slots to expend. Considering how nova-spam is on the monsters' side by default, I don't find this too problematic. It still costs the spell slot for counterspell on the PCs' side.

clash
2020-05-08, 02:22 PM
If I were to do this, I would simplify this into a simple opposed spellcasting roll or simultaneous choice.
Option 1: Bob wants to counter alice, bob uses countrerspell, they both make a spellcasting roll. If Bob is higher the spell fails.
Option 2: Bob wants to counter Alice, bob uses counterspell. They blindly both select a spell slot to empower it(no spell slot also an option). They both los ehte spell slots empowering but whoever selects the higher one wins. No back and forth.

Segev
2020-05-08, 02:27 PM
If I were to do this, I would simplify this into a simple opposed spellcasting roll or simultaneous choice.
Option 1: Bob wants to counter alice, bob uses countrerspell, they both make a spellcasting roll. If Bob is higher the spell fails.
Option 2: Bob wants to counter Alice, bob uses counterspell. They blindly both select a spell slot to empower it(no spell slot also an option). They both los ehte spell slots empowering but whoever selects the higher one wins. No back and forth.

Option 1 is more or less what's there already if the counterspeller uses too low a spell slot to auto-counter the original spell: an opposed check occurs.

The whole point of this version is the back-and-forth, making it a power-on-power clash.

Veldrenor
2020-05-08, 05:12 PM
At no point can Bob use a 3rd level spell slot to counterspell Alice's 5th level spell.

Did that clarify everything for you about my intent?
That does clarify the intent, yes. The wording of the spell has to be changed to reflect that intent, though, as the current wording does not require the Counterspell be cast at the level of the spell it is countering. Your intended version also makes Counterspelling with a partial caster or Warlock even worse, since they can’t even attempt to stop high-level magic.



Hm. I need to look that one up. Does it only add to the roll for counterspelling things of higher spell slot? Or does it give power back to the counterspeller? I thought it was the latter.
Improved Abjuration allows you to add your proficiency bonus to any ability check that you have to make as part of casting an abjuration spell. So it makes it easier to Dispel Magic/Counterspell using a lower-level slot. I don’t know if there are other uses, but that’s the main one. Although you did make me remember the War Mage’s Power Surge ability, which gets quite a bit worse with this change to Counterspell because it’s harder and more expensive to stick it.



Can they really effectively counterspell even now? And SHOULD they be able to?

Warlocks, Redemption Paladins, and Arcane Tricksters, yes. Eldritch Knights, depends on the build. True, they don’t have a 9th level slot to guaranteed Counterspell a Meteor Swarm, but a 3rd level Counterspell from one of them is just as effective as a 3rd level Counterspell from a non-Abjurer/non-Bard. With your version of Counterspell they can’t even get in the game because they don’t have higher spell slots.

Whether or not they should be able to effectively Counterspell is purely a matter of opinion. For me, the answer is “yes.” The power disparity in 5e might be less than it was in previous editions, but magic is still dominant. There are fewer save-or-suck effects, but they still exist. Even mid-tier spells can be a huge pain in the ass. In one of the games I'm in, two sessions in a row we had enemy casters slip away via Dimension Door because none of us have Counterspell. One caster did it to us twice in the same session. Many spells can be counterplayed: stay out of range, take cover, Dispel Magic/Calm Emotions, Darkness/Fog Cloud, etc. But there are others for which there is very little counterplay other than Counterspell. As such, partial casters/Warlocks should be just as good with Counterspell as full-casters so that there is some counterplay with such spells. Otherwise, your party is flat out screwed unless you've got a Sorcerer or Wizard in the party.



Potentially, yes, but it also means the enemies actually are at risk of running out of spell slots in the fight, rather than being able to nova entirely because the fight will be over before they actually use up all their spell slots (one way or another).
Depends on when they’re encountered. If the enemy is your first fight of the day and you have a whole bunch of slots to burn then yes, they run the risk of running out of spell slots in the bidding war. If you’re a couple fights in, there’s still no chance of them running out of spell slots because you don’t have powerful enough slots left to even cast Counterspell (since your version must be cast at the same level as the spell it's countering).



That's a good question that I hadn't considered. My knee-jerk response is that he's SOL, because he doesn't have spell slots to expend. Considering how nova-spam is on the monsters' side by default, I don't find this too problematic.
Another complication to this: what about monsters that have Counterspell as an innate spell ability? They can't Counterspell anything above 3rd level, obviously, but if this modified Counterspell requires a spell slot be expended can they even do that much?

Democratus
2020-05-08, 06:25 PM
The "or see a spell come into effect" is problematic.

Doesn't really seem kosher to be able to Counterspell, for example, a Eldritch Blast cast by someone you aren't even aware of 200' away and around a corner just because it strikes someone 10' away and in sight.

Seems like Counterspell should be countering a caster, not a remote effect.

Segev
2020-05-09, 05:59 PM
The "or see a spell come into effect" is problematic.

Doesn't really seem kosher to be able to Counterspell, for example, a Eldritch Blast cast by someone you aren't even aware of 200' away and around a corner just because it strikes someone 10' away and in sight.

Seems like Counterspell should be countering a caster, not a remote effect.

I actually, until the debate started that sparked this thread concept, thought it was directed at the spell effect, not the caster. I was trying to enable that, here.

I need to consider some things from this thread on who should be able to counterspell what and how effectively. Because a number of the critiques are technically working as I intended, but my use case assumptions seem off from others’ and I need to determine if and how much I want to adjust the use case.

To that end, I request and invite commentary on who should be able to counterspell whom and how reliably. And why you feel that way, whether it’s backed by mathematical considerations or just a gut feel or any other instincts or experiences.

Thanks!

Kane0
2020-05-09, 10:05 PM
I like the ‘always requires a contested check’ fix, maybe dropping to a 2nd level spell to compensate the removal of automatic success.

Counterspell should never be a sure thing, you are literally trying to interrupt a spell taking effect at the last moment. Simply burning a spell slot shouldnt be a guarantee of success, no matter the slot level. You also don’t want to spend time playing meta mind games with the DM/players nor a game of resource expending one-upmanship.
Plus this retains the bonuses that bards and abjurers get to counterspell attempts.

Segev
2020-05-09, 11:58 PM
Simplicity would suggest that you roll a spell attack roll against the save DC of the enemy caster, and if you succeed, the spell is countered. It may need to be worded more complicatedly as an ability check to make the Abjurer and War Wizard abilities work with it, though.

Should magic items, e.g. wands, that let you cast spells automatically foil counterspell?

Should counterspell be vulnerable to counterspell?

Should you be able to tell what you're countering before you decide to counter it? <- To this one, I answer "yes," not for any balance reason, but for game-flow reasons. I'm not entirely sure how to word the spell to enable this. I'm thinking something to do with seeing the effects of the spell, but that leads to odd territory with charm person and the like. But I definitely don't want to force a retraining of all players (including DMs) into being cagey about what spell they're casting just in case a counterspell is coming, and I especially don't want to have to have it be a lengthy chain of "I start to cast a spell" "Then I start to cast a spell as a reaction" "Then I start to cast a second spell as a reaction!" "The the other wizard on this side of the battlefield starts to cast a spell as a reaction!" just in case any of those happen not to actually be counterspells. I know more than the first caster also casting counterspell vs. the second caster's counterspell is...unlikely...but it's not impossible, especially if strategy and tactics start to be built around it.

The multi-layering could be prevented by making counterspell uncounterable. Maybe it requires seeing a spell being cast with something other than a reaction? Can't be just about "your turn," because that owuld make the multi-caster pile-up an issue.

But the real core issue I have is the caginess about what spell is being cast, and the three extra back-and-forth steps added by it. Compare:

"I cast fireball!"
"I counterspell it!"

vs.

"I start casting a spell."
"I start casting a spell as a reaction."
"I don't do anything new in response to that."
"My spell is counterspell, cast from a 3rd-level slot."
"Darn. Mine was fireball, but that counters it."

The last line in the second one IS necessary; it confirms that counterspell worked. Had the initial spell been, say, prismatic spray, the last line would have revealed that it was NOT countered.

And even in face-to-face gaming, that level of back-and-forth for so little exchange gets tiresome.

Onos
2020-05-11, 04:06 AM
I like the overall execution here, but I do have a couple of suggestions. First of all, I'm not sure about automatically identifying spells; I could see spell level and possibly spell school being automatic, which does still add an element of uncertainty to things but eliminates the core problem of "am I completely wasting a slot?"

I'm also not sure about being unable to counterspell a counterspell - I feel that a third caster involved in the duel should have an opportunity to interfere with counter attempts.

Segev
2020-05-11, 02:13 PM
An interesting approach. The feedback is a new take.

Honestly, "what I want" out of it at this point is even unclear, because my purpose was to try to rectify issues others were expressing. But the more I dig into it, the more I realize that I don't think there's consensus on what it SHOULD do.

Personally, the biggest thing I want out of it is that its use doesn't require a change to the general flow of the game. That is, I want it to not be "cheating" to decide only after hearing "I cast magic missile" whether to use counterspell and what level slot to use. Or, more precisely, I don't want correct usage of it to require that players say, "I start casting a spell," and then wait to see if a reaction spell starts up, and then decide whether to start their own reaction spell, all decisions to cast reaction spells having to be expressed before any of the spells are identified. He should just be able to say, "I cast cone of cold," and if the enemy wants to counterspell it, the enemy's player shouldn't have to wrack his brain trying to guess if the enemy would think to use a higher-level spell slot, and how much higher.

Onos
2020-05-12, 08:54 AM
Counterspell
3rd-level abjuration
Casting time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature casting a spell within 60 feet of you
Range: 60 feet
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

When you see a creature casting a spell within range you may attempt to use your own magic to disrupt the spell. Perform a contested skill check between the caster and the counterspeller. The counterspeller must announce what level they are casting counterspell at. Each will roll 1d20 and add the modifier from their casting stat to the roll. The caster will add the difference between the counterspell level and the spell level (counterspell level minus spell level) to their roll. Casters with proficiency or expertise in Arcana may add their proficiency to their roll (proficiency for proficiency, twice proficiency for expertise).

If the counterspeller's roll exceeds the caster's roll then the caster's spell fails. If the counterspeller's roll exceeds the caster's roll by ten or more then the counterspeller turns the energy of the spell back on the caster and the caster takes 1d4 points of force damage for each level the counterspell was cast at.

This spell may not be used to counter a spell cast by an object (scroll, wand, ring, etc...)
.

I like this! My very slight quibble is that I'm not 100% on not being able to counter wands. If we consider that Subtle Spell should either make it impossible to - or grant Advantage against the - counterspell, I'd suggest "Subtle" as a property of some wands and such.

Regarding the issue of flow, I favour the route of announcing spell level (even vaguely works) when casting, and leaving it up to the players to decide what to do. "The lich casts a spell" isn't at all useful, but "With a quick gesture, the lich gathers a handful of black flame" and "Deep shadows coalesce as the lich incants agonising, profane sounds; you can almost hear the Weave itself scream" definitely give you a rough idea of scale. Verismilitudinaly (?), that's all the characters would be working on anyway.

I like giving Sorcs a bit of a leg-up with identification, maybe throw them the spell school as well when casting?

Segev
2020-05-12, 06:26 PM
I've been thinking about this overnight and I'm not sure how this can be addressed. We can either have the caster declare which spell is being cast and give everyone free information or we can have the caster declare that a spell is being cast and engage in the 'bluff'. I favor the latter. Thematically I'd like to give sorcerers some sort of ability/chance to sense what sort of spell is being cast because they are so bound up with magic.

Why, though, is the bluff so important?

Serious question, not a rhetorical dismissal of the notion. What is it that it does that is important, and why does it need to be there? The answer will guide possible replacements for it, or potentially inspire ways to achieve the same goal without needing to alter natural game-flow.

PairO'Dice Lost
2020-05-13, 12:28 PM
If we want to change the rules to allow casters to know what other casters are casting, or perhaps make some sort of save or skill check to glean information about what they are casting that might work better than re-writing counterspell.

Maybe a straight saving throw against the primary casting stat to identify what spell is being cast? Maybe some sort of skill check?

3e solved that problem already: identifying spells as they're cast is a standard Spellcraft use with a standard DC of 15+spell level, and 3e counterspelling (among other things) requires you to ID a spell before you can do anything to/with it. An Arcana check with a lower base DC can serve the same function here.

Segev
2020-05-13, 01:48 PM
Without arguing that the bluff is necessary I'm going to say that from a mechanical and thematic point of view with the rules as written the only thing the characters know is that a spell is being cast. So that's the only information they should get and they have to base their decisions on this limited information. This results in the bluff situation.

If we want to change the rules to allow casters to know what other casters are casting, or perhaps make some sort of save or skill check to glean information about what they are casting that might work better than re-writing counterspell.

Maybe a straight saving throw against the primary casting stat to identify what spell is being cast? Maybe some sort of skill check?

The thing is, if the bluff isn't necessary, then writing counterspell such that you can cast it after the spell is cast but before it's resolved should be little problem.

Breccia
2020-05-13, 01:57 PM
Did...did you just write a beam struggle (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BeamOWar) for D&D?

Segev
2020-05-13, 02:22 PM
Did...did you just write a beam struggle (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BeamOWar) for D&D?

Deliberately, yes. :smallcool:

heavyfuel
2020-05-13, 06:28 PM
Reading that thread, the complaints most people seem to have are, in no particular order:

1- You can Counterspell a Counterspell
2- Counterspell disproportionally affects half and one third casters
3- Counterspell gives you a massive action economy advantage because you counter an Action with a Reaction

So, if we are houseruling, we need something to address these 3 issues.

My solution is simple:

Casting Time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell with a casting time of 1 action or longer.

Adding this underlined part to the Counterspell solves problem 1, aliviates problem 2, since half casters and third casters are often (even if not usually) casting Bonus and Immediate actions spells anyway.

As for problem 3, I'd argue it's not really a problem. Counterspell has a pretty short range. If you're 31ft away from the enemy caster, you can just move and cast your spell and they can do nothing. If that means you'll provoke an OA, then shame on you for having bad positioning in the first place, but you still get to make a choice. Take the attack and then cast, or avoid the attack and don't cast. Casters in 5e can already ignore interruptions in the form of readied attacks, letting them avoid interruptions in the form of a ultra nerfed Counterspell is just pulling up all the stops for classes that don't really need it.

Your proposed solution disproportionately favors NPC casters who will have no problem nova-ing during their counterspells attempt.

Coretex
2020-05-13, 09:01 PM
Counterspell
3rd-level abjuration
Casting time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a spell taking effect or a creature casting a spell within 60 feet of you
Range: 60 feet
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

When you see a creature casting a spell, or see a spell come into effect, within range, you use your own magic to counter the effect. When you do, you engage the other caster in a sort of magical tug-of-war. He may bolster his spell by spending a spell slot of the same level you used to cast this spell or higher. You may bolster your counterspell attempt likewise, using an additional spell slot of the same level he used to bolster his or higher. This back-and-forth of potentially-escalating minimum spell slots continues until one of you chooses not to - or cannot - expend a spell slot of the appropriate level.

If he chose not to bolster his spell, or you were the last one to expend a spell slot in this magical duel, the spell is countered and has no effect. If he was the last one to expend a spell slot in this magical duel, his spell takes effect normally.

This spell cannot be used to counter another counterspell.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell from a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the minimum level spell slot the other caster must use to bolster his spell matches the spell slot you used.

I really like this over the default counterspell. I love the way that using counterspell FEELS more impactful this way, the potential to use up all of the scary spellcaster's slots is intoxicating.

I think we can resolve most of the issues raised by later commenters by simply allowing the lower level spell slots to be used by BOTH sides, and force a check (difficulty scaling with the extremity of the leap in spell levels) to see if it is effective. For example:

Caster 1: I cast Animate Objects (5th level spell)
Caster 2: I Counterspell with a 3rd level slot, rolling to make it count as a 5th. Success!
Caster 1: I pile on another 5th level slot to make it go.

This allows partial casters to still attempt saving-the-day, but gives full casters more options for making damn sure a spell doesnt(or does) go off. Which I think is appropriate.
It also allows Abjurers to have their bonus apply, by letting them more consistently use lower level slots to counterspell.
It means that Inspiration and other modifiers can come into play, allowing either side to gamble for a chance at burning the other side's slots.
Even though Caster 1 got their spell off in the example above, Caster 2 forced them to burn another 5th slot to ensure it, at the cost of only a 3rd. This way counterspell feels good even if it fails, and it you fail the roll that was your greed!

To summarise:
A slot of equal value will automatically counter the spell unless Caster 1 counters back.
A slot of higher value will raise the threshhold for the counter slot.
A slot of lower value requires a roll (DC 12 arcana + 3 per slot level difference perhaps?) to become a desired countering spell. (you could gamble higher and attempt to block at 6th with a 3rd level slot, but the DC (in this suggestion) would be 21)

Kane0
2020-05-14, 04:21 AM
My solution is simple:

Casting Time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell with a casting time of 1 action or longer.


I like it.
I think i’ll combine this with the ‘always attempt the check’ and reduction to a 2nd level spell.

And at my table we don’t do reactions during our own turn, so thats already taken care of.