Spells for a ring of Counterspells [Archive] - Wizards Community

Spells for a ring of Counterspells [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Lightblade
04-11-06, 03:38 PM What spells do people normally cast into (or have a friend cast into) their ring of counterspells? I plan on buying one on my next AR, but other than asking the sorc to cast a magic missle or scortching ray into it, i'm not sure what to do.
redgamer
04-11-06, 05:04 PM Frankly if you aren't regularly putting a level 3 or higher spell in it you are probably too low level to have wisely spend 4k on a ring of counter spells.
Sieylianna
04-11-06, 05:53 PM What spells do people normally cast into (or have a friend cast into) their ring of counterspells? I plan on buying one on my next AR, but other than asking the sorc to cast a magic missle or scortching ray into it, i'm not sure what to do.

The only spells my PC ever had in her ring of counterspells: Dispel Magic, Greater Dispel Magic, Disintegrate and Feeblemind. There are some candiates in the new rules, but you're unlikely to see them often enough to make it worthwhile.

Ed
Lupo
04-11-06, 09:09 PM The only spells my PC ever had in her ring of counterspells: Dispel Magic, Greater Dispel Magic, Disintegrate and Feeblemind. There are some candiates in the new rules, but you're unlikely to see them often enough to make it worthwhile.

Ed

"reciprocal gyre" makes another good choice.

for characters that are reliant on their buffs "dispell" and "greater dispell" are the first choices.

ciao

martin m.
JamesMaissen
04-11-06, 11:50 PM What spells do people normally cast into (or have a friend cast into) their ring of counterspells? I plan on buying one on my next AR, but other than asking the sorc to cast a magic missle or scortching ray into it, i'm not sure what to do.

The best question is more: what are you afraid of being thrown at you?

For one of my characters, strangely enough it's ray of enfeeblement. He's a high strength thug though and would prefer that you throw maximized disintegrates at him than a simple ray of enfeeblement.

Standard spells for most people have already been addressed: dispel magic, greater dispel, feeblemind, etc.

Also it depends on what's trendy in your modules as well as if you have ready access to the spell immunity spell (which will cover things up to a certain level that are SR yes).

-James
GreatSiron
04-11-06, 11:57 PM I don't know about you guys, but I'd be storing Fireball on it. I've been on the wrong end of those one too many times.
Lightblade
04-12-06, 12:15 AM I don't know about you guys, but I'd be storing Fireball on it. I've been on the wrong end of those one too many times.

Fireball doesn't work, since it's an area spell, and doesn't target me.
RE: what level: I'm an 8th level character: Bard 2 / Druid 6. I won't be able to cast dispel magic until 11th level for my build, unfortunately, so it looks like i'll be begging spells from wizards and clerics. Thanks for the advice!
Mortepierre
04-12-06, 04:08 AM Every since the SpC came out, my choice is Binding Winds. As an arcane caster, I hate it. Of course, the trick is to find someone capable of casting it for you since only druids and clerics with access to the Windstorm domain can...
Sieylianna
04-12-06, 07:29 AM "reciprocal gyre" makes another good choice.

That was one of the spells I was thinking about as a candidate, but haven't seen enough to make it worthwhile. I've only seen reciprocal gyre used once in living greyhawk and that was a battle interactive. That's been it. If it's common in your region, then it may be a good choice.

Ed
solbergb
04-12-06, 02:32 PM Ring of counterspells doesn't need the spell to target you, you only have to be affected. The wording is totally different from, say, spell turning, although folks get it confused and there is enough table variation that you must ALWAYS ask the DM to be sure that whatever you intend to put in will work (although I don't think any DM would turn down a purely targeted spell).

By the description and my reading, it should work on rays and area spells (neither of which work with spell turning) but check with your Judge.

With that in mind, I see a lot of Evards and Disintegrate spells going into those items. Certainly that's my plan for my sorc, who has the one and is very vuln to it and will eventually have the other. If area spells work, silence could be a good pick, especially if you expect to be fighting bards or clerics.
Lupo
04-12-06, 04:25 PM Ring of counterspells doesn't need the spell to target you, you only have to be affected. The wording is totally different from, say, spell turning, although folks get it confused and there is enough table variation that you must ALWAYS ask the DM to be sure that whatever you intend to put in will work (although I don't think any DM would turn down a purely targeted spell).

By the description and my reading, it should work on rays and area spells (neither of which work with spell turning) but check with your Judge.

With that in mind, I see a lot of Evards and Disintegrate spells going into those items. Certainly that's my plan for my sorc, who has the one and is very vuln to it and will eventually have the other. If area spells work, silence could be a good pick, especially if you expect to be fighting bards or clerics.

ok, here are the relevant texts (from the srd):

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++

Rring of Counterspells: This ring might seem to be a ring of spell storing upon first examination. However, while it allows a single spell of 1st through 6th level to be cast into it, that spell cannot be cast out of the ring again. Instead, should that spell ever be cast upon the wearer, the spell is immediately countered, as a counterspell action, requiring no action (or even knowledge) on the wearer’s part. Once so used, the spell cast within the ring is gone. A new spell (or the same one as before) may be placed in it again.
Moderate evocation; CL 11th; Forge Ring, imbue with spell ability; Price 4,000 gp.

Spell Turning
Abjuration
Level: Luck 7, Magic 7, Sor/Wiz 7
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: Until expended or 10 min./level
Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you are turned back upon the original caster. The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells.
From seven to ten (1d4+6) spell levels are affected by the turning. The exact number is rolled secretly.
When you are targeted by a spell of higher level than the amount of spell turning you have left, that spell is partially turned. The subtract the amount of spell turning left from the spell level of the incoming spell, then divide the result by the spell level of the incoming spell to see what fraction of the effect gets through. For damaging spells, you and the caster each take a fraction of the damage. For nondamaging spells, each of you has a proportional chance to be affected.
If you and a spellcasting attacker are both warded by spell turning effects in operation, a resonating field is created.
Roll randomly to determine the result.
d% Effect
01–70 Spell drains away without effect.
71–80 Spell affects both of you equally at full effect.
81–97 Both turning effects are rendered nonfunctional for 1d4 minutes.
98–100 Both of you go through a rift into another plane.
Arcane Material Component: A small silver mirror.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++

Both of them are mostly similar in stopping any targetted effect AND ranged touch spells. In addition the RING is able to turn spells that are delivered via TOUCH ATTACKS. the ring does not turn area spells or other effects.

this it at least my interpretation of the strange phrase "Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells." if they wanted to make it complicated they were successful. but i see "touch range" as a refernce to a spell's range of "touch", nothing else.

so definitely no use of evard's in a ring.

ciao

martin m.
GreatSiron
04-12-06, 05:11 PM Fireball doesn't work, since it's an area spell, and doesn't target me.

Rats. I usually don't have too much trouble with single target spells, (I am a rogue after all, and we usually aren't high on the NPC spellcaster's threat list), so I guess I'd go with disintergrate. My fort saves suck.
copper_wyrmling
04-12-06, 08:56 PM Both of them are mostly similar in stopping any targetted effect AND ranged touch spells. In addition the RING is able to turn spells that are delivered via TOUCH ATTACKS. the ring does not turn area spells or other effects.

The reason why some people (including myself) believe that the ring of counterspells stops area spells is that there's a distinction between "spells that have you as a target" (required for Spell Turning) and "spells cast on you" (as in the Ring of Counterspells description). The former case, imo, only includes those spells that have a Target entry - the note in Spell Turning about Area and Effect spells not being affected is a clarification of this point. The latter case is broader - how broad depends on judge interpretation.

I tend to use the Invisibility rules as a precedent, and count any spell targeting you, or any spell whose area or effect includes you, as a "spell cast on you", and thus subject to being counterspelled by the ring. That said, I think I've seen the full spectrum of rulings on this issue (including that the ring stops Evards but only for the wearer, which is just *wrong* - counterspelling either works or it doesn't) - it's one of the questions I try to ask judges at the start of a session.

My cleric, who relies heavily on hours / level and quickened buffs, normally puts Dispel Magic in her ring. Of course, the only times when I forget to tell the judge I'm doing it are exactly those sessions where we get hit by chained Dispel Magic :rolleyes: I've asked for Disintegrate from mages a few times, but most of our Disintegrates seem to come from beholders at the moment (one of our regional authors loves his beholders), and you can't counterspell eye rays.
Lupo
04-12-06, 09:18 PM The reason why some people (including myself) believe that the ring of counterspells stops area spells is that there's a distinction between "spells that have you as a target" (required for Spell Turning) and "spells cast on you" (as in the Ring of Counterspells description). The former case, imo, only includes those spells that have a Target entry - the note in Spell Turning about Area and Effect spells not being affected is a clarification of this point. The latter case is broader - how broad depends on judge interpretation.

I tend to use the Invisibility rules as a precedent, and count any spell targeting you, or any spell whose area or effect includes you, as a "spell cast on you", and thus subject to being counterspelled by the ring. That said, I think I've seen the full spectrum of rulings on this issue (including that the ring stops Evards but only for the wearer, which is just *wrong* - counterspelling either works or it doesn't) - it's one of the questions I try to ask judges at the start of a session.

My cleric, who relies heavily on hours / level and quickened buffs, normally puts Dispel Magic in her ring. Of course, the only times when I forget to tell the judge I'm doing it are exactly those sessions where we get hit by chained Dispel Magic :rolleyes: I've asked for Disintegrate from mages a few times, but most of our Disintegrates seem to come from beholders at the moment (one of our regional authors loves his beholders), and you can't counterspell eye rays.

come over to the infinite monkey yahoo group :-)

a fireball is targetted at an intersection of the magic grid. you only happen to be in the area that is effected by a fireball, so the spell is never "casted on you", even when you happen to be enlarged and occuppy the intersection the fireball is centered on.

but there are those spells that pick a certain number of targets in a specified area, like "sleep" or "slow" that make it muddy again.

ciao

martin m.

ps: yea you might get table variations on this, and making the spell turning exclusively for the wearer of the ring makes it even more complicated, not to forget the problem, where the turned spell then should have its intersection for a start.
Jay_Ibero_911
04-12-06, 11:13 PM I think what a lot of people are doing is confusing counterspell and spell turning, because, provided they have the spell available to cast themselves, andy spellcaster can counterspell any spell. The way I see it, the ring of counterspell works like you have always readied an action to counterspell a specific spell, and therefore, like the normal use of counterspell, will work with any spell you put into the ring. Therefore, fireball is a perfectly viable candidate for a ring of counterspells.
Lupo
04-13-06, 07:02 AM I think what a lot of people are doing is confusing counterspell and spell turning, because, provided they have the spell available to cast themselves, andy spellcaster can counterspell any spell. The way I see it, the ring of counterspell works like you have always readied an action to counterspell a specific spell, and therefore, like the normal use of counterspell, will work with any spell you put into the ring. Therefore, fireball is a perfectly viable candidate for a ring of counterspells.

uhps, yea i obviously barked at the wrong tree. reference to "counterspell" instead of "spell turning", i admit i was totally wrong :rolleyes:

ok here is the text:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++

Readying to Counterspell: You may ready a counterspell against a spellcaster (often with the trigger “if she starts casting a spell”). In this case, when the spellcaster starts a spell, you get a chance to identify it with a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell level). If you do, and if you can cast that same spell (are able to cast it and have it prepared, if you prepare spells), you can cast the spell as a counterspell and automatically ruin the other spellcaster’s spell. Counterspelling works even if one spell is divine and the other arcane.
A spellcaster can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, but it doesn’t always work.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++

therefore everytime a wearer is effected by a spell (or would be effected) the ring is automatically counterspelling the spell and the spell is ruined in totall.

ciao

martin m.
solbergb
04-13-06, 07:53 PM The reason I said there is table variation is that there is.

"Cast upon you" is not defined. Therefore variation.

I also subscribe to the "use invisibility as a precedent" - if the effect would cause somebody to lose his invisibility if you were in the area, or if it was aimed at you, the ring works.

However I recognize that some folks interpret it as essentially the same as "it must target you" limiting the spell use to only spells with a "TARGET" type entry or touch spells.

There is a middle group that somehow includes ray effects in the "target" but doesn't include area effects. I find this inconsistent, but they tend to be the same folks who think you can chain rays, because they confuse attack targeting with targeted spells.

If you never want to ask your judge, only load it with targeted spells (although if you do dispel magic, you still have to ask because it has a targeted mode and an area mode).

I prefer asking the judge about the spell I want to use, and having a backup in mind in case he has a more conservative opinion. It's a decent item under any interpretation.
Lupo
04-14-06, 08:29 AM The reason I said there is table variation is that there is.

"Cast upon you" is not defined. Therefore variation.

I also subscribe to the "use invisibility as a precedent" - if the effect would cause somebody to lose his invisibility if you were in the area, or if it was aimed at you, the ring works.

However I recognize that some folks interpret it as essentially the same as "it must target you" limiting the spell use to only spells with a "TARGET" type entry or touch spells.

There is a middle group that somehow includes ray effects in the "target" but doesn't include area effects. I find this inconsistent, but they tend to be the same folks who think you can chain rays, because they confuse attack targeting with targeted spells.

If you never want to ask your judge, only load it with targeted spells (although if you do dispel magic, you still have to ask because it has a targeted mode and an area mode).

I prefer asking the judge about the spell I want to use, and having a backup in mind in case he has a more conservative opinion. It's a decent item under any interpretation.

no, the invisibility or anything else already running would not be counterspelled. the rings special effect and the counterspell action must occur just before the actual spell is cast.
so a ring would counterspell a "grease" when the wearer would be subject to the first reflex save. but the grease would work normal when a wearer enters a greased area.
so it is not possible to get rid of a "evard's" by running into it with a ring of counterspell.

ciao

martin m.
solbergb
04-16-06, 04:24 AM Um...yeah, that's how invisibility works. I didn't mean to imply any other interpretation.

You lose invis if someone is potentially affected when you cast it. You don't lose it if they voluntarily enter the area later.

The "area spells in ring of counterspells" logic is pretty much the same. If you subscribe to the view, pretty much any way of casting spell that would cause you to lose invisibility would subject that spell to being counterspelled by the ring. (the exception being that the ring intrepreted along these lines treats any casting of the stored spell as hostile, even "harmless" spells that wouldn't drop invis)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Lightblade 04-11-06, 03:38 PM	What spells do people normally cast into (or have a friend cast into) their ring of counterspells? I plan on buying one on my next AR, but other than asking the sorc to cast a magic missle or scortching ray into it, i'm not sure what to do.
redgamer 04-11-06, 05:04 PM	Frankly if you aren't regularly putting a level 3 or higher spell in it you are probably too low level to have wisely spend 4k on a ring of counter spells.
Sieylianna 04-11-06, 05:53 PM	What spells do people normally cast into (or have a friend cast into) their ring of counterspells? I plan on buying one on my next AR, but other than asking the sorc to cast a magic missle or scortching ray into it, i'm not sure what to do. The only spells my PC ever had in her ring of counterspells: Dispel Magic, Greater Dispel Magic, Disintegrate and Feeblemind. There are some candiates in the new rules, but you're unlikely to see them often enough to make it worthwhile. Ed
Lupo 04-11-06, 09:09 PM	The only spells my PC ever had in her ring of counterspells: Dispel Magic, Greater Dispel Magic, Disintegrate and Feeblemind. There are some candiates in the new rules, but you're unlikely to see them often enough to make it worthwhile. Ed "reciprocal gyre" makes another good choice. for characters that are reliant on their buffs "dispell" and "greater dispell" are the first choices. ciao martin m.
JamesMaissen 04-11-06, 11:50 PM	What spells do people normally cast into (or have a friend cast into) their ring of counterspells? I plan on buying one on my next AR, but other than asking the sorc to cast a magic missle or scortching ray into it, i'm not sure what to do. The best question is more: what are you afraid of being thrown at you? For one of my characters, strangely enough it's ray of enfeeblement. He's a high strength thug though and would prefer that you throw maximized disintegrates at him than a simple ray of enfeeblement. Standard spells for most people have already been addressed: dispel magic, greater dispel, feeblemind, etc. Also it depends on what's trendy in your modules as well as if you have ready access to the spell immunity spell (which will cover things up to a certain level that are SR yes). -James
GreatSiron 04-11-06, 11:57 PM	I don't know about you guys, but I'd be storing Fireball on it. I've been on the wrong end of those one too many times.
Lightblade 04-12-06, 12:15 AM	I don't know about you guys, but I'd be storing Fireball on it. I've been on the wrong end of those one too many times. Fireball doesn't work, since it's an area spell, and doesn't target me. RE: what level: I'm an 8th level character: Bard 2 / Druid 6. I won't be able to cast dispel magic until 11th level for my build, unfortunately, so it looks like i'll be begging spells from wizards and clerics. Thanks for the advice!
Mortepierre 04-12-06, 04:08 AM	Every since the SpC came out, my choice is Binding Winds. As an arcane caster, I hate it. Of course, the trick is to find someone capable of casting it for you since only druids and clerics with access to the Windstorm domain can...
Sieylianna 04-12-06, 07:29 AM	"reciprocal gyre" makes another good choice. That was one of the spells I was thinking about as a candidate, but haven't seen enough to make it worthwhile. I've only seen reciprocal gyre used once in living greyhawk and that was a battle interactive. That's been it. If it's common in your region, then it may be a good choice. Ed
solbergb 04-12-06, 02:32 PM	Ring of counterspells doesn't need the spell to target you, you only have to be affected. The wording is totally different from, say, spell turning, although folks get it confused and there is enough table variation that you must ALWAYS ask the DM to be sure that whatever you intend to put in will work (although I don't think any DM would turn down a purely targeted spell). By the description and my reading, it should work on rays and area spells (neither of which work with spell turning) but check with your Judge. With that in mind, I see a lot of Evards and Disintegrate spells going into those items. Certainly that's my plan for my sorc, who has the one and is very vuln to it and will eventually have the other. If area spells work, silence could be a good pick, especially if you expect to be fighting bards or clerics.
Lupo 04-12-06, 04:25 PM	Ring of counterspells doesn't need the spell to target you, you only have to be affected. The wording is totally different from, say, spell turning, although folks get it confused and there is enough table variation that you must ALWAYS ask the DM to be sure that whatever you intend to put in will work (although I don't think any DM would turn down a purely targeted spell). By the description and my reading, it should work on rays and area spells (neither of which work with spell turning) but check with your Judge. With that in mind, I see a lot of Evards and Disintegrate spells going into those items. Certainly that's my plan for my sorc, who has the one and is very vuln to it and will eventually have the other. If area spells work, silence could be a good pick, especially if you expect to be fighting bards or clerics. ok, here are the relevant texts (from the srd): ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++ Rring of Counterspells: This ring might seem to be a ring of spell storing upon first examination. However, while it allows a single spell of 1st through 6th level to be cast into it, that spell cannot be cast out of the ring again. Instead, should that spell ever be cast upon the wearer, the spell is immediately countered, as a counterspell action, requiring no action (or even knowledge) on the wearer’s part. Once so used, the spell cast within the ring is gone. A new spell (or the same one as before) may be placed in it again. Moderate evocation; CL 11th; Forge Ring, imbue with spell ability; Price 4,000 gp. Spell Turning Abjuration Level: Luck 7, Magic 7, Sor/Wiz 7 Components: V, S, M/DF Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Personal Target: You Duration: Until expended or 10 min./level Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you are turned back upon the original caster. The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells. From seven to ten (1d4+6) spell levels are affected by the turning. The exact number is rolled secretly. When you are targeted by a spell of higher level than the amount of spell turning you have left, that spell is partially turned. The subtract the amount of spell turning left from the spell level of the incoming spell, then divide the result by the spell level of the incoming spell to see what fraction of the effect gets through. For damaging spells, you and the caster each take a fraction of the damage. For nondamaging spells, each of you has a proportional chance to be affected. If you and a spellcasting attacker are both warded by spell turning effects in operation, a resonating field is created. Roll randomly to determine the result. d% Effect 01–70 Spell drains away without effect. 71–80 Spell affects both of you equally at full effect. 81–97 Both turning effects are rendered nonfunctional for 1d4 minutes. 98–100 Both of you go through a rift into another plane. Arcane Material Component: A small silver mirror. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++ Both of them are mostly similar in stopping any targetted effect AND ranged touch spells. In addition the RING is able to turn spells that are delivered via TOUCH ATTACKS. the ring does not turn area spells or other effects. this it at least my interpretation of the strange phrase "Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells." if they wanted to make it complicated they were successful. but i see "touch range" as a refernce to a spell's range of "touch", nothing else. so definitely no use of evard's in a ring. ciao martin m.
GreatSiron 04-12-06, 05:11 PM	Fireball doesn't work, since it's an area spell, and doesn't target me. Rats. I usually don't have too much trouble with single target spells, (I am a rogue after all, and we usually aren't high on the NPC spellcaster's threat list), so I guess I'd go with disintergrate. My fort saves suck.
copper_wyrmling 04-12-06, 08:56 PM	Both of them are mostly similar in stopping any targetted effect AND ranged touch spells. In addition the RING is able to turn spells that are delivered via TOUCH ATTACKS. the ring does not turn area spells or other effects. The reason why some people (including myself) believe that the ring of counterspells stops area spells is that there's a distinction between "spells that have you as a target" (required for Spell Turning) and "spells cast on you" (as in the Ring of Counterspells description). The former case, imo, only includes those spells that have a Target entry - the note in Spell Turning about Area and Effect spells not being affected is a clarification of this point. The latter case is broader - how broad depends on judge interpretation. I tend to use the Invisibility rules as a precedent, and count any spell targeting you, or any spell whose area or effect includes you, as a "spell cast on you", and thus subject to being counterspelled by the ring. That said, I think I've seen the full spectrum of rulings on this issue (including that the ring stops Evards but only for the wearer, which is just wrong - counterspelling either works or it doesn't) - it's one of the questions I try to ask judges at the start of a session. My cleric, who relies heavily on hours / level and quickened buffs, normally puts Dispel Magic in her ring. Of course, the only times when I forget to tell the judge I'm doing it are exactly those sessions where we get hit by chained Dispel Magic :rolleyes: I've asked for Disintegrate from mages a few times, but most of our Disintegrates seem to come from beholders at the moment (one of our regional authors loves his beholders), and you can't counterspell eye rays.
Lupo 04-12-06, 09:18 PM	The reason why some people (including myself) believe that the ring of counterspells stops area spells is that there's a distinction between "spells that have you as a target" (required for Spell Turning) and "spells cast on you" (as in the Ring of Counterspells description). The former case, imo, only includes those spells that have a Target entry - the note in Spell Turning about Area and Effect spells not being affected is a clarification of this point. The latter case is broader - how broad depends on judge interpretation. I tend to use the Invisibility rules as a precedent, and count any spell targeting you, or any spell whose area or effect includes you, as a "spell cast on you", and thus subject to being counterspelled by the ring. That said, I think I've seen the full spectrum of rulings on this issue (including that the ring stops Evards but only for the wearer, which is just wrong - counterspelling either works or it doesn't) - it's one of the questions I try to ask judges at the start of a session. My cleric, who relies heavily on hours / level and quickened buffs, normally puts Dispel Magic in her ring. Of course, the only times when I forget to tell the judge I'm doing it are exactly those sessions where we get hit by chained Dispel Magic :rolleyes: I've asked for Disintegrate from mages a few times, but most of our Disintegrates seem to come from beholders at the moment (one of our regional authors loves his beholders), and you can't counterspell eye rays. come over to the infinite monkey yahoo group :-) a fireball is targetted at an intersection of the magic grid. you only happen to be in the area that is effected by a fireball, so the spell is never "casted on you", even when you happen to be enlarged and occuppy the intersection the fireball is centered on. but there are those spells that pick a certain number of targets in a specified area, like "sleep" or "slow" that make it muddy again. ciao martin m. ps: yea you might get table variations on this, and making the spell turning exclusively for the wearer of the ring makes it even more complicated, not to forget the problem, where the turned spell then should have its intersection for a start.
Jay_Ibero_911 04-12-06, 11:13 PM	I think what a lot of people are doing is confusing counterspell and spell turning, because, provided they have the spell available to cast themselves, andy spellcaster can counterspell any spell. The way I see it, the ring of counterspell works like you have always readied an action to counterspell a specific spell, and therefore, like the normal use of counterspell, will work with any spell you put into the ring. Therefore, fireball is a perfectly viable candidate for a ring of counterspells.
Lupo 04-13-06, 07:02 AM	I think what a lot of people are doing is confusing counterspell and spell turning, because, provided they have the spell available to cast themselves, andy spellcaster can counterspell any spell. The way I see it, the ring of counterspell works like you have always readied an action to counterspell a specific spell, and therefore, like the normal use of counterspell, will work with any spell you put into the ring. Therefore, fireball is a perfectly viable candidate for a ring of counterspells. uhps, yea i obviously barked at the wrong tree. reference to "counterspell" instead of "spell turning", i admit i was totally wrong :rolleyes: ok here is the text: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++ Readying to Counterspell: You may ready a counterspell against a spellcaster (often with the trigger “if she starts casting a spell”). In this case, when the spellcaster starts a spell, you get a chance to identify it with a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell level). If you do, and if you can cast that same spell (are able to cast it and have it prepared, if you prepare spells), you can cast the spell as a counterspell and automatically ruin the other spellcaster’s spell. Counterspelling works even if one spell is divine and the other arcane. A spellcaster can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, but it doesn’t always work. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++ therefore everytime a wearer is effected by a spell (or would be effected) the ring is automatically counterspelling the spell and the spell is ruined in totall. ciao martin m.
solbergb 04-13-06, 07:53 PM	The reason I said there is table variation is that there is. "Cast upon you" is not defined. Therefore variation. I also subscribe to the "use invisibility as a precedent" - if the effect would cause somebody to lose his invisibility if you were in the area, or if it was aimed at you, the ring works. However I recognize that some folks interpret it as essentially the same as "it must target you" limiting the spell use to only spells with a "TARGET" type entry or touch spells. There is a middle group that somehow includes ray effects in the "target" but doesn't include area effects. I find this inconsistent, but they tend to be the same folks who think you can chain rays, because they confuse attack targeting with targeted spells. If you never want to ask your judge, only load it with targeted spells (although if you do dispel magic, you still have to ask because it has a targeted mode and an area mode). I prefer asking the judge about the spell I want to use, and having a backup in mind in case he has a more conservative opinion. It's a decent item under any interpretation.
Lupo 04-14-06, 08:29 AM	The reason I said there is table variation is that there is. "Cast upon you" is not defined. Therefore variation. I also subscribe to the "use invisibility as a precedent" - if the effect would cause somebody to lose his invisibility if you were in the area, or if it was aimed at you, the ring works. However I recognize that some folks interpret it as essentially the same as "it must target you" limiting the spell use to only spells with a "TARGET" type entry or touch spells. There is a middle group that somehow includes ray effects in the "target" but doesn't include area effects. I find this inconsistent, but they tend to be the same folks who think you can chain rays, because they confuse attack targeting with targeted spells. If you never want to ask your judge, only load it with targeted spells (although if you do dispel magic, you still have to ask because it has a targeted mode and an area mode). I prefer asking the judge about the spell I want to use, and having a backup in mind in case he has a more conservative opinion. It's a decent item under any interpretation. no, the invisibility or anything else already running would not be counterspelled. the rings special effect and the counterspell action must occur just before the actual spell is cast. so a ring would counterspell a "grease" when the wearer would be subject to the first reflex save. but the grease would work normal when a wearer enters a greased area. so it is not possible to get rid of a "evard's" by running into it with a ring of counterspell. ciao martin m.
solbergb 04-16-06, 04:24 AM	Um...yeah, that's how invisibility works. I didn't mean to imply any other interpretation. You lose invis if someone is potentially affected when you cast it. You don't lose it if they voluntarily enter the area later. The "area spells in ring of counterspells" logic is pretty much the same. If you subscribe to the view, pretty much any way of casting spell that would cause you to lose invisibility would subject that spell to being counterspelled by the ring. (the exception being that the ring intrepreted along these lines treats any casting of the stored spell as hostile, even "harmless" spells that wouldn't drop invis)