Counterspell tweak

[wookietek]

I put this on Reddit, and no one actually answered the question. I'm not surprised, lol, but I'm also not looking for alternative options. I already know those. But would it mess with balance or fun or whatever much if casters could, as a reaction of their own, upcast the spell about be counterspelled? Like you see the enemy is about to counter your spell so you last ditch add a boost to try to avoid that happening.

Counterspell is cast as a reaction, and it can suck when the BBEG counters your healing, spare the dying, or revivify. Actually it just sucks in general, but it's still a great spell for the party and the bad guys and it's fair, and part of the fun is getting thwarted. I don't want to change it in and of itself.

[KorvinStarmast]

Carping at the margins, as I see it.

but it's still a great spell for the party and the bad guys and it's fair, and part of the fun is getting thwarted.
Yep, counterspell is fine as is. :smallsmile:

[RSP]

But would it mess with balance or fun or whatever much if casters could, as a reaction of their own, upcast the spell about be counterspelled? Like you see the enemy is about to counter your spell so you last ditch add a boost to try to avoid that happening.


I don’t think there’s any balance issues, but the real question, to me, is:

does this increase fun for your Players?

If yes is the answer, roll with it.

Other than that, just be aware this could slow down play, if each side is continually allowed to one-up the other. That is: PC adds that boost to try and avoid Countering, so the BBEG adds a boost to their Counterspell level, which then causes the PC to increase their spell level again, etc.

Also, just for clarity: upping the slot level doesn’t guarantee the spell isn’t Counterspell-ed.

[Yakk]

I made 1 change.

DC to counter a spell is (spell level *5).

You always have to make a check. You gain a +4 bonus per slot level of your counterspell above 3.

A level 3 vs 3 is 55% chance to counter.
A level 3+X vs 3+X loses 5% per X; so 9th level counterspell vs 9th level spell only works 25% of the time (without further boosts; an abjurer brings it back up to 55%, abjurer with enhance ability is 80%, a bard 40%, a bard or sorcerer with glibness using a 9th level slot is 45-48, which auto-counterspells.)

The point is that the action economy of counterspell is honestly too good; burn a reaction and a resource to defeat an action and an equivalent resource. And with a bit of work, you can spend LESS resources to defeat MORE.

This makes it scale downward with higher level slots. Maximum optimization lets you trade equal resources for equal (9th level slot counterspells a 9th level spell).

It also makes the "guess the spell level" game more continuous; get it wrong, you just don't have enough bonus.

[Burley]

I don’t think there’s any balance issues, but the real question, to me, is:

does this increase fun for your Players?

If yes is the answer, roll with it.

Other than that, just be aware this could slow down play, if each side is continually allowed to one-up the other. That is: PC adds that boost to try and avoid Countering, so the BBEG adds a boost to their Counterspell level, which then causes the PC to increase their spell level again, etc.

Also, just for clarity: upping the slot level doesn’t guarantee the spell isn’t Counterspell-ed.

Well, you can't increase the spell level after you cast. You have to declare what spell slot you're casting from. So, its not a back-and-forth as much as it is making adjustments next round.

Honestly, in my limited experience with the spell, it plays out like this:
DM: The cult leader casts Scorching Ray.
Wiz: I react with Counterspell.
DM:... Welp... Ok. Bard, its your turn.

[Mellack]

Are you forgetting that the original caster can also cast couterspell to counter the counterspell?

DM: The cult leader casts Scorching Ray.
Wiz: I react with Counterspell.
DM: The cult leader uses their reaction to Counterspell you.

[Burley]

Are you forgetting that the original caster can also cast couterspell to counter the counterspell?

DM: The cult leader casts Scorching Ray.
Wiz: I react with Counterspell.
DM: The cult leader uses their reaction to Counterspell you.

I could be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure you can't cast two leveled spells in one turn. Like, if you metamagic quicken a 1st level spell to a bonus action, your action must be a cantrip. If you are casting a 2nd level scorching ray, you can only react with a cantrip.

Edit: I guess I'm wrong. Bonus actions and Reactions are different enough, I guess.

[PhantomSoul]

Personally, I think optimally Counterspell could fail (so you always roll for success, optimally for narrative as a competition or with a DC that incorporates enemy spellcasting capability).


I could be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure you can't cast two leveled spells in one turn. Like, if you metamagic quicken a 1st level spell to a bonus action, your action must be a cantrip. If you are casting a 2nd level scorching ray, you can only react with a cantrip.

(I'll look for a source and edit, unless somebody gets here first.)

It's Bonus Action Casting that gives restrictions, rather than Action + Reaction, though whether you can interrupt a Spell you're currently Casting to Counterspell is definitely on the "ask your DM" list!

[Burley]

Personally, I think optimally Counterspell could fail (so you always roll for success, optimally for narrative as a competition or with a DC that incorporates enemy spellcasting capability).



It's Bonus Action Casting that gives restrictions, rather than Action + Reaction, though whether you can interrupt a Spell you're currently Casting to Counterspell is definitely on the "ask your DM" list!

Yeah, I got there a minute before you. :smallredface:

I don't mind that Counterspell doesn't roll for success. I think of Counterspell as a miniature and instantaneous Antimagic Field, unravelling the magic as its being weaved. Stronger magic, though, may punch through and requires the casters have a contest of wills.

[RSP]

Well, you can't increase the spell level after you cast. You have to declare what spell slot you're casting from. So, its not a back-and-forth as much as it is making adjustments next round.

Honestly, in my limited experience with the spell, it plays out like this:
DM: The cult leader casts Scorching Ray.
Wiz: I react with Counterspell.
DM:... Welp... Ok. Bard, its your turn.

Are you ignoring the OP here? The thread is specifically about changing Counterspell so you can increase the level of a spell after someone else tries to Counterspell.

[Tanarii]

Important question: Do you rule the counterspeller have to cast it blind, without knowing what spell is being cast?

If so, this probably isn't a necessary tweak.

[MoiMagnus]

Are you forgetting that the original caster can also cast couterspell to counter the counterspell?

DM: The cult leader casts Scorching Ray.
Wiz: I react with Counterspell.
DM: The cult leader uses their reaction to Counterspell you.

I don't really like assuming that every caster has access to counterspell, even less assuming that every NPC (or even PC) that could have access to this spell have it prepared.
[In this case, the cult leader being a divine spellcaster, it would be quite unlikely for them to have access to Counterspell, even if they're "optimised" which they might not even be]

Though that's correct that if the NPC has access to counterspell, since most battles PC vs NPC is at the advantage of the PCs, they should probably spam counterspell at every possible occasion as the chance of them dying in this battle is higher than the chance of them needing to have spare spell slots at the end of the battle.

[greenstone]

does this increase fun for your Players?

If yes is the answer, roll with it.

Like the OP, I worried about counterspell. I felt that if you are playing a caster then the only thing you realy do is cast spells, and counterspell is the GM going NOOONYAHAHAHAHA YOU CAN"T DO ANYTHING MISS A TURN HA!

I asked my players and they all said I'm overthinking. They are fine with foes counterspelling them. Yes, it sucks a bit to lose a big spel slot for nothing, but it did cost the foe a spell slot as well. Also, they get to couterspell the NPCs (and they do, a lot, it's great to see!).

[Burley]

Are you ignoring the OP here? The thread is specifically about changing Counterspell so you can increase the level of a spell after someone else tries to Counterspell.

Not deliberately. But, by the time I got to the end of the thread and had something I wanted to comment on, I forgot the single sentence that outlined that.

My bad, RSP. My bad.


If I can comment on the OPs change, I don't think I'd like it in game. Its not fun to have your spells countered in the first place and moving the goal post to ensure you lose your action feels bad.

[Catullus64]

Personally I would like to see counterspell reworked so that it takes a little bit more thought. As is, I don't think counterspell is unfair or too frustrating, but it is a little boring. An enemy casts a spell, you snap your fingers and press the un-spell button, with little sense that you're reacting to the specific spell cast like in a classic wizards' duel. The 3e counterspell system, where you had to have the exact same spell ready to counter (sometimes Dispel Magic would do it) with was overly narrow, but it was definitely more thematically rich.

I don't have a great idea of how you would do that, but I think the right approach would be for Counterspelling and Dispelling to be generalized spellcasting mechanics rather than specific spells. At my own table, I might even be happy with "If you can creatively and simply justify how one of your prepared spells would counter the spell being thrown at you, you can use it like Counterspell." But that would never fly for an actual game rule.

[Pildion]

I put this on Reddit, and no one actually answered the question. I'm not surprised, lol, but I'm also not looking for alternative options. I already know those. But would it mess with balance or fun or whatever much if casters could, as a reaction of their own, upcast the spell about be counterspelled? Like you see the enemy is about to counter your spell so you last ditch add a boost to try to avoid that happening.

Counterspell is cast as a reaction, and it can suck when the BBEG counters your healing, spare the dying, or revivify. Actually it just sucks in general, but it's still a great spell for the party and the bad guys and it's fair, and part of the fun is getting thwarted. I don't want to change it in and of itself.

If the player wants to spend a 2nd spell slot to "boost" their spell to try and avoid the counterspell as a reaction I would probably be ok with that. They are now spending 2 spell slots for 1 spell, I think that should balance it out well enough. I don't think I would do this to my players with an NPC caster though. Fighting the BBEG caster that normally counterspells is enough. I want my caster players to have fun haha.

[Pildion]

Important question: Do you rule the counterspeller have to cast it blind, without knowing what spell is being cast?

If so, this probably isn't a necessary tweak.

Tanarii brings up a good point. If your playing that you'll be counterspelling blind or that you make your players\NPCs do an Arcana check to see if they know what's being cast, that puts another tuff layer on counterspell. Might not really need this change if your playing this way at all.

[Mellack]

Personally I would like to see counterspell reworked so that it takes a little bit more thought. As is, I don't think counterspell is unfair or too frustrating, but it is a little boring. An enemy casts a spell, you snap your fingers and press the un-spell button, with little sense that you're reacting to the specific spell cast like in a classic wizards' duel. The 3e counterspell system, where you had to have the exact same spell ready to counter (sometimes Dispel Magic would do it) with was overly narrow, but it was definitely more thematically rich.

I don't have a great idea of how you would do that, but I think the right approach would be for Counterspelling and Dispelling to be generalized spellcasting mechanics rather than specific spells. At my own table, I might even be happy with "If you can creatively and simply justify how one of your prepared spells would counter the spell being thrown at you, you can use it like Counterspell." But that would never fly for an actual game rule.

That does sound interesting, but it also requires that you let everyone know what spell you are casting before it takes effect. Then you have to explain it if it isn't a spell they know well. Then you have to wait for them to go through all their spells to see if they have something that might oppose it. If you have counterspell, you know you can use it whenever someone says they cast. It is simple, but also fast. You might find your option slowing the game quite a bit.