What if Counterspell were a metamagic instead of a spell?

[Segev]

Make it cost 1 sp, and allow expenditure of a spell slot to try for automatic success if the spell slot matches or exceeds the target spell level.

This makes it much rarer, and mostly the province of sorcerers, with some few casters spending a feat on it.

Would that make it both better for those who can take it, and less of an issue in general because it is a more dedicated choice that fewer would have? Would it be so good as to be must-have on every sorcerer? A must-have feat on every caster?

[JNAProductions]

Make it cost 1 sp, and allow expenditure of a spell slot to try for automatic success if the spell slot matches or exceeds the target spell level.

This makes it much rarer, and mostly the province of sorcerers, with some few casters spending a feat on it.

Would that make it both better for those who can take it, and less of an issue in general because it is a more dedicated choice that fewer would have? Would it be so good as to be must-have on every sorcerer? A must-have feat on every caster?

It'd allow earlier and cheaper access to Counterspell. Level one with VHuman or CLineage, level three for Sorcerers, level four for non-Sorcerers of non-feat races.

I don't think it'd be a good idea. Mostly because then you can expend 1 SP and a 1st level slot to try and counter a 9th level slot.

[MrStabby]

Well it would suck to play an abjuration wizard in a no-feats game.

Still, if a feat basically gave you close to a spell known and a 3rd level spell slot of that caliber then I can see bards and fiend pact warlocks being keen to take it... but also fey rangers that could get some serious bonuses to their charisma checks as well.

[JackPhoenix]

Well it would suck to play an abjuration wizard in a no-feats game.

Or a War Magic wizard. Their level 6 ability is meh at best as it is, but without Counterspell?

[RSP]

It would provide a pretty significant niche for Sorcerers, but overall, I’m not sure what the OP’s issue with Counterspell is, so I’m not sure if this would help that.

Can the OP expound on what it is they’re trying to fix with this?

[loki_ragnarock]

It would provide a pretty significant niche for Sorcerers, but overall, I’m not sure what the OP’s issue with Counterspell is, so I’m not sure if this would help that.

Can the OP expound on what it is they’re trying to fix with this?

I, too, am curious. I can think of reasons I'd do this, but they're all fluff forward reasons.

[f5anor]

This makes it much rarer, and mostly the province of sorcerers, with some few casters spending a feat on it.

This is a far too powerful mechanic to be exclusive to some spellcaster. This change would make Sorcerers dominant in one stroke since it would be impossible to cast spells against them under regular circumstances.

An alternative maybe would be to make it part of the spellcasting ability as such. This would be decoupled from the spell mechanic and would allow for more symmetry between classes, but this would make counterspelling too common.

I like more and more the 5e approach of turning class abilities into spells. This gives a good mechanic for the frequency of use and also a simple way to add/remove these powers from a class.

[Segev]

It would provide a pretty significant niche for Sorcerers, but overall, I’m not sure what the OP’s issue with Counterspell is, so I’m not sure if this would help that.

Can the OP expound on what it is they’re trying to fix with this?

Purely thought experiment, for me. I actually have no problem with counterspell, but I often see it brought up as a bad mechanic.

[Kane0]

Make it cost 1 sp, and allow expenditure of a spell slot to try for automatic success if the spell slot matches or exceeds the target spell level.

This makes it much rarer, and mostly the province of sorcerers, with some few casters spending a feat on it.

Would that make it both better for those who can take it, and less of an issue in general because it is a more dedicated choice that fewer would have? Would it be so good as to be must-have on every sorcerer? A must-have feat on every caster?

An interesting idea
- It would by default be a check instead of auto-countering 3rd level and lower, so in that way it is a bit weaker but also more versatile since you can choose to use a 1st or 2nd level slot on it
- It would be cheaper at base cost compared to 3rd level slots, even if you're using it in conjunction with Arcane Guidance
- You can't also use it together with Subtle Spell, but its much less likely that an opponent would be able to counter your counter because it now requires either A) sorcerer levels with counter picked as a metamagic or B) the Metamagic Adept feat with counter picked
- You can get it via Metamagic Adept, becoming able to counter at level 1 with variant human which also preserves spell slots

Corollary to this idea, perhaps take out Counterspell as its own spell and make it a class feature of full casters that get access to Dispel Magic?

[olskool]

We went the RuneQuest method with counterspell. You cast it and it now has a duration of 1 minute per level of casting. When a spell comes into the zone of protection, the caster decides if the spell acts or not by using their REACTION to trigger the spell.

[KorvinStarmast]

Make it cost 1 sp, and allow expenditure of a spell slot to try for automatic success if the spell slot matches or exceeds the target spell level. Maybe, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Do not restrict access to that spell to sorcerers.

[Hytheter]

Make it cost 1 sp, and allow expenditure of a spell slot to try for automatic success if the spell slot matches or exceeds the target spell level.


Well, my first note would be that this isn't a metamagic at all. Metamagics are modifiers to spells, but this seems like it would be a feature in its own right.

[RSP]

Purely thought experiment, for me. I actually have no problem with counterspell, but I often see it brought up as a bad mechanic.

I’d say at least a SP per level of the target spell, but more likely SPs equaling the cost of casting a spell of that level (so 5 SP for a 3rd level spell).


Well, my first note would be that this isn't a metamagic at all. Metamagics are modifiers to spells, but this seems like it would be a feature in its own right.

I think it might actually still be: you’re just modifying someone else’s spell, not your own.

[Hytheter]

I think it might actually still be: you’re just modifying someone else’s spell, not your own.

I meant specifically your own spells. From the book: "At 3rd level, you gain the ability to twist your spells to suit your needs." I'd also argue that negating a spell entirely goes a tad beyond modifying. :P

And since it's not really metamagic, it need not spend both slots and sorcery points just to pretend that it is - it would be all round simpler if it only used one or the other.

Whether this would be a positive change to the game in the first place is another matter, of course. I don't know if counterspell needs changing, but if I were to act on the assumption that it is I don't know if 'make it something only sorcerers can do' would be my direction.

[RSP]

I meant specifically your own spells. From the book: "At 3rd level, you gain the ability to twist your spells to suit your needs." I'd also argue that negating a spell entirely goes a tad beyond modifying. :P


That’s correct: I was thinking in the vein of Empowered Healing which isn’t a Metamagic, but acts like one.

[SharkForce]

Well it would suck to play an abjuration wizard in a no-feats game.

Still, if a feat basically gave you close to a spell known and a 3rd level spell slot of that caliber then I can see bards and fiend pact warlocks being keen to take it... but also fey rangers that could get some serious bonuses to their charisma checks as well.


Or a War Magic wizard. Their level 6 ability is meh at best as it is, but without Counterspell?

both of these subclasses would be perfectly fine even if counterspell didn't exist at all. there's plenty of power in them that isn't related to counterspell.

[Rav]

I think it might actually still be: you’re just modifying someone else’s spell, not your own.

This...this might actually be the better way to handle this sort of idea. Instead of replacing counterspell, simply add a new metamagic option that can modify other people's spells. Something like:

As a reaction, when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell that doesn't require concentration, you may spend 2* sp to cause it to require concentration. The targeted spellcaster can voluntarily abandon this spell before it requires this concentration, if they do, the creature's spell fails and has no effect.

*adjust sp to taste for balance that was just a placeholder.

[Psyren]

This...this might actually be the better way to handle this sort of idea. Instead of replacing counterspell, simply add a new metamagic option that can modify other people's spells. Something like:

As a reaction, when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell that doesn't require concentration, you may spend 2* sp to cause it to require concentration. The targeted spellcaster can voluntarily abandon this spell before it requires this concentration, if they do, the creature's spell fails and has no effect.

*adjust sp to taste for balance that was just a placeholder.

You definitely need some kind of counterplay around that (like a saving throw or ability check), because you're likely automatically ending something very powerful with this one - either something they're already concentrating on, or (if they choose to keep that) whatever it was they were about to cast now. Effectively making them choose between an automatic counterspell or an automatic dispel. That could be even more powerful than the current counterspell, and I haven't even gotten to the doubled range.

[Rav]

You definitely need some kind of counterplay around that (like a saving throw or ability check), because you're likely automatically ending something very powerful with this one - either something they're already concentrating on, or (if they choose to keep that) whatever it was they were about to cast now. Effectively making them choose between an automatic counterspell or an automatic dispel. That could be even more powerful than the current counterspell, and I haven't even gotten to the doubled range.

Yeah, it makes it interesting at least. Instead of being a counterspell-clone it accomplished a similar but different function via a different means. Like I said, adjust sp to taste for balance. Make it one per level of the target spell or whatever. It leaves the choice in the hands of the presumably-enemy-spellcaster so I'm not sure you could call that more powerful than counterspell. Might have a different outcome than counterspell, yeah, but, that is what makes it interesting.

Also, what double range? Counterspell is also 60ft.

[Witty Username]

I would make it cost at least 1 gp... :).

[MrStabby]

both of these subclasses would be perfectly fine even if counterspell didn't exist at all. there's plenty of power in them that isn't related to counterspell.

The trouble is, we play the game for fun, not power. So the question is more around whether there is enough fun left in the class. Now the war wizard... maybe. The abjuration wizard is reduced to having pretty much entirely passive benefits without their level 6 ability. Still powerful enough (mostly because wizard) but not a fun enough subclass.

[Burley]

I've always imagined counterspell to work how it did in 3.0/3.5: you need to be able to identify the spell being cast before you can counter it. I know those aren't the rules of 5e, but my head canon now makes counterspell something Wizards do, because they've studied all the spells and would, therefore, know what finger waggles they need to do backwards.
I can get behind a sorcerer counterspelling by sorta eating or draining the energy? But, making it as cheap/free as a single sorcery point? I'd build a sorcerer just to make sure no magic ever happens within range of me.

[Segev]

Old-school counterspell was a function individual spells: you had to have readied an action to counter a spell, and then you had to identify the spell being cast and know/have it prepared and essentially cast it, yourself, to counter the other one.

[Rukelnikov]

This...this might actually be the better way to handle this sort of idea. Instead of replacing counterspell, simply add a new metamagic option that can modify other people's spells. Something like:

As a reaction, when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell that doesn't require concentration, you may spend 2* sp to cause it to require concentration. The targeted spellcaster can voluntarily abandon this spell before it requires this concentration, if they do, the creature's spell fails and has no effect.

*adjust sp to taste for balance that was just a placeholder.

Maybe a bit tricky, but the prequisite, as is, doesn't work .

"when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell that doesn't require concentration".

RAW you see a creature casting a spell, to know whether it requires concentration or not, you need to spend a reaction to identify the spell being cast, thus, for the prequisite to be met, you need to have already spent your reaction, thus it can never be used.

Even if someone else identifies the spell and tells you it doesn't require concentration, its a bit of an unclear territory, because YOU are seeing someone casting a spell, and someone else is telling its not concentration. (for the record I hate that mechanic and don't use it, but its the RAW for identifying spells being cast, even if optional)


You definitely need some kind of counterplay around that (like a saving throw or ability check), because you're likely automatically ending something very powerful with this one - either something they're already concentrating on, or (if they choose to keep that) whatever it was they were about to cast now. Effectively making them choose between an automatic counterspell or an automatic dispel. That could be even more powerful than the current counterspell, and I haven't even gotten to the doubled range.

Well, It would definitely be cheaper, but the effect per se is less powerful, for starters it wouldn't be able to "counter" any concentration spell, and for those spells it does apply, the target gets the choice of losing their current concentration (if any), or losing the current spell.

So it can't counter concentration, and if the target isn't concentrating on anything it has no use against instantaneous spells.


Old-school counterspell was a function individual spells: you had to have readied an action to counter a spell, and then you had to identify the spell being cast and know/have it prepared and essentially cast it, yourself, to counter the other one.

Or if you didn't have it prepared you could just go with Dispel Magic instead of the spell in question.

The other DM of my party ran it that you can't use a spell slot of lower level to counter. If you wanna counter a 5th level spell, you spend a 5th level slot and its countered, or you don't, you can't spend a 3rd level one and roll. I was pretty pissed since I had planned to play a bard using JoAT for improved counters, but... at the end of the day, it wasn't so terrible, it was still a useful spell to have, albeit much more expensive than RAW.

[Cass]

Purely thought experiment, for me. I actually have no problem with counterspell, but I often see it brought up as a bad mechanic.

Then it makes it harder to obtain but doesn't really fix it being a bad mechanic.

[Burley]

Old-school counterspell was a function individual spells: you had to have readied an action to counter a spell, and then you had to identify the spell being cast and know/have it prepared and essentially cast it, yourself, to counter the other one.

IIRC, you could counter, say, a fireball with a cone of cold, if, as you said, you readied to counter, made a successful spellcraft check to know the spell was fireball and had cone of cold prepared that day and were in casting range of the enemy (casting range of the spell you're using to counter). Some spells specifically said they countered each other (Darkness and Light), but there was a lot of convincing DMs that your spell was your chosen spell was a good counter.
Or, you could ready an action, spellcraft check and use Dispel Magic, which required an opposed caster level check that mechanically favored the dispellee.

I like the theming of this a lot more, but 5e was sorta designed to reduce having multiple points of failure around a single action.

If I were to shift around the rules of 5e counterspell (and dispel magic) to suit a sorcerer, I'd let them use the Heighten Spell metamagic (if they have it), but sorta tweaking it to be advantage for you, rather than disadvantage for the enemy. It's functionally rather similar and it'd take a AbjWiz10/Sorc3 before you could start stacking benefits to near-automatic success. For the level of investment into one-weird-trick, I'd say other 13th level characters have weirder.