Couterspelling. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Couterspelling. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Worshiper_of_Moradin
07-20-07, 02:59 AM Does anyone use it? I haven't had one player or dm use it in any game so far. It seem like it would be a good idea for a team of spellcasters to use. One wizard prepares alot of dispel magics and offense spells ( to couter emeny spells) while the other procedes to blast the crap outta of the emenies.
Azezel
07-20-07, 07:19 AM In practice - Fireball is the best counterspell.

It interupts casting and deals damage - two for the price of one.
Drag0nUL
07-20-07, 08:09 AM In my group we do it on case-by-case basis. Almost everyone plays some form of spellcaster (mostly multiclass) so dispel magic availability is no problem. We don't usually use counterspelling much since we can overpower most opposition with a barrage of offensive spells (and after all 'the best defense is a strong offense'). But in the situations where our arcane/divine/psionic artillery was 'outgunned', or when we had to play it safe (like defending a city and wanting to preserve as much of the low-level troops as possible) we have used counterspelling with great success.
Psikerlord
07-20-07, 08:19 AM counterspelling is best for the DMs multiple, low level caster NPCs trying to overpower your party casters. Not so useful for the party itself, good old fashioned direct damage works just as well (at least up to the mid levels, anyway). We've never used it in our campaign, and we're just coming into 11th level (started at 1st)
2nd Ed Paladin
07-20-07, 09:23 AM I have always thought it more useful in mass combat situations, otherwise lvl 1 warriors would die en masse to fireballs, evards, etc. Never seen it used in normal adventuring.
runestar
07-20-07, 09:29 AM I have always thought it more useful in mass combat situations, otherwise lvl 1 warriors would die en masse to fireballs, evards, etc. Never seen it used in normal adventuring.

Yes, but the problem is that it is typically more efficacious to just ready an action to whack the offending spellcaster with a high damage spell like those orb spells when he starts casting a spell instead. Not only will he likely lose the spell (by failing to make the high concentration check), he also takes damage.

As for counterspelling, it is typically a 1-for-1 exchange, so it is rarely ever worth it, unless you take lvs in archmage, and even then, its effectiveness is still dependent on the nature of the spell being countered.
psionichamster
07-20-07, 10:26 AM as above, it is very dependent on the type of action you're dispelling.

twice now, our eberron party has encountered Quori Dreammasters. one of their favorite things to do is to Project Quori Spririt and get another ally in for the fight.

one that has schism, multiple attacks, and better ac than the dreammaster.

both times, my beguiler has readied to counter his power, and both times have successfully stopped him from getting that more powerful melee combatant.

so, it was definitely worth it in the long run.

-the hamster
Leilond
07-20-07, 10:43 AM It depends on the situation. If you are aware of a greate advantage in the "melee situation" and you think that "if nothing change we'll win in few rounds", counterspelling can be the better choice
stuporhero93
07-20-07, 12:32 PM Sometimes in games where I Dm, I allow creative counters. I give the counterer about 30 secs to explain why his spell should counter the other. Then I pass judgement.

For example. A PC Hexblade cast Pyrotechnics on a fireball. He turned it all into blinding light.
Salla
07-20-07, 08:43 PM I never get to do it, because I'm the only DM who ever makes any use of spellcasting/SLA-using opponents. :p
Optimized_Commoner
07-20-07, 09:58 PM Sometimes in games where I Dm, I allow creaive counters. I give the counterer about 30 secs to explain why his spell should counter the other. Then I pass judgement.

For example. A PC Hexblade cast Pyrotechnics on a fireball. He turned it all into blinding light.

That is an awesome idea.
was_fired
07-20-07, 10:47 PM As written it's a waste to counterspell. You need to either give up the exact same spell after readying an action to do so meaning if you didn't have the spell he cast you wasted your action and if you did all you ended up doing is negating what you could have done to him too. With improved counterspell you get more versatility, but then you end up giving upper a better spell to counter an inferior one with all of the same qualifiers applying. If you use dispel magic you end up only having a 50% chance of countering a spell cast by an equal level caster.

As pointed out above readying an action to cast a spell when the other caster performs a standard or full-round action (if your DM lets you be that general) or when he casts a spell (if he doesn't) you force a Concentration Check DC 10 + Spell Level + Your Damage AND you get to deal damage. Since on a successful save most spells still do 1.75 * your level damage that means that even with maxed out ranks in Concentration they still have better than a 50% failure chance most of the time making it better than dispel magic.
Morwen
07-21-07, 01:42 AM Counterspelling is useful only if you have the Reactive Counterspell feat. That way, instead of wasting your current round to ready an action to Counterspell, you Counterspell when required and then waste your next round.
Molitor
07-21-07, 02:37 AM I can think of a myriad of reasons to counterspell; chiefly among them..1) you want to take your enemy hostage and not kill him ..2) your DCs are garbage compared to the opposition(DCs dont come into account in counterspelling)..3) you have more spells than the enemy and therefor just wish to run them dry...4) you have all the really nifty feats that make counterspelling badass!..5) you are in close combat and a preemptive strike with any area of effect spell would hurt your side as much as the opposition...6) You can counterspell the enemy's helpful spells.
runestar
07-21-07, 03:49 AM In an epic game, I might have an epic spellcaster, such as the elder titan take epic counterspell (as the feat in the epic insights article). This way, he can effectively lockdown all the spellcasters in the party while beating down on the fighters, while squeezing out a quickened spell or 2 each round.:)
stuporhero93
07-21-07, 11:37 AM Yes but with creative counterspelling, things get interesting.

Light of Lumia, for example, was countered by globe of darkness. The bolts, kept coming, but were now dealing negative energy damage. The undead controlled by the drow cleric were now healed instead of hurt :D
FRRC
07-21-07, 12:27 PM Stops your team being toasted by an enemy fireball.
was_fired
07-21-07, 07:05 PM With creative counterspells vs the system as written it actually becomes useful from the sound of it, but even then it needs a slight boost most of the time. Also, FRRC as it was pointed out before it doesn't stop the enemy from casting a fireball well. Readying an action to fireball him when he casts a fireball does a better job AND it ends up using exactly as many resources.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Worshiper_of_Moradin 07-20-07, 02:59 AM	Does anyone use it? I haven't had one player or dm use it in any game so far. It seem like it would be a good idea for a team of spellcasters to use. One wizard prepares alot of dispel magics and offense spells ( to couter emeny spells) while the other procedes to blast the crap outta of the emenies.
Azezel 07-20-07, 07:19 AM	In practice - Fireball is the best counterspell. It interupts casting and deals damage - two for the price of one.
Drag0nUL 07-20-07, 08:09 AM	In my group we do it on case-by-case basis. Almost everyone plays some form of spellcaster (mostly multiclass) so dispel magic availability is no problem. We don't usually use counterspelling much since we can overpower most opposition with a barrage of offensive spells (and after all 'the best defense is a strong offense'). But in the situations where our arcane/divine/psionic artillery was 'outgunned', or when we had to play it safe (like defending a city and wanting to preserve as much of the low-level troops as possible) we have used counterspelling with great success.
Psikerlord 07-20-07, 08:19 AM	counterspelling is best for the DMs multiple, low level caster NPCs trying to overpower your party casters. Not so useful for the party itself, good old fashioned direct damage works just as well (at least up to the mid levels, anyway). We've never used it in our campaign, and we're just coming into 11th level (started at 1st)
2nd Ed Paladin 07-20-07, 09:23 AM	I have always thought it more useful in mass combat situations, otherwise lvl 1 warriors would die en masse to fireballs, evards, etc. Never seen it used in normal adventuring.
runestar 07-20-07, 09:29 AM	I have always thought it more useful in mass combat situations, otherwise lvl 1 warriors would die en masse to fireballs, evards, etc. Never seen it used in normal adventuring. Yes, but the problem is that it is typically more efficacious to just ready an action to whack the offending spellcaster with a high damage spell like those orb spells when he starts casting a spell instead. Not only will he likely lose the spell (by failing to make the high concentration check), he also takes damage. As for counterspelling, it is typically a 1-for-1 exchange, so it is rarely ever worth it, unless you take lvs in archmage, and even then, its effectiveness is still dependent on the nature of the spell being countered.
psionichamster 07-20-07, 10:26 AM	as above, it is very dependent on the type of action you're dispelling. twice now, our eberron party has encountered Quori Dreammasters. one of their favorite things to do is to Project Quori Spririt and get another ally in for the fight. one that has schism, multiple attacks, and better ac than the dreammaster. both times, my beguiler has readied to counter his power, and both times have successfully stopped him from getting that more powerful melee combatant. so, it was definitely worth it in the long run. -the hamster
Leilond 07-20-07, 10:43 AM	It depends on the situation. If you are aware of a greate advantage in the "melee situation" and you think that "if nothing change we'll win in few rounds", counterspelling can be the better choice
stuporhero93 07-20-07, 12:32 PM	Sometimes in games where I Dm, I allow creative counters. I give the counterer about 30 secs to explain why his spell should counter the other. Then I pass judgement. For example. A PC Hexblade cast Pyrotechnics on a fireball. He turned it all into blinding light.
Salla 07-20-07, 08:43 PM	I never get to do it, because I'm the only DM who ever makes any use of spellcasting/SLA-using opponents. :p
Optimized_Commoner 07-20-07, 09:58 PM	Sometimes in games where I Dm, I allow creaive counters. I give the counterer about 30 secs to explain why his spell should counter the other. Then I pass judgement. For example. A PC Hexblade cast Pyrotechnics on a fireball. He turned it all into blinding light. That is an awesome idea.
was_fired 07-20-07, 10:47 PM	As written it's a waste to counterspell. You need to either give up the exact same spell after readying an action to do so meaning if you didn't have the spell he cast you wasted your action and if you did all you ended up doing is negating what you could have done to him too. With improved counterspell you get more versatility, but then you end up giving upper a better spell to counter an inferior one with all of the same qualifiers applying. If you use dispel magic you end up only having a 50% chance of countering a spell cast by an equal level caster. As pointed out above readying an action to cast a spell when the other caster performs a standard or full-round action (if your DM lets you be that general) or when he casts a spell (if he doesn't) you force a Concentration Check DC 10 + Spell Level + Your Damage AND you get to deal damage. Since on a successful save most spells still do 1.75 * your level damage that means that even with maxed out ranks in Concentration they still have better than a 50% failure chance most of the time making it better than dispel magic.
Morwen 07-21-07, 01:42 AM	Counterspelling is useful only if you have the Reactive Counterspell feat. That way, instead of wasting your current round to ready an action to Counterspell, you Counterspell when required and then waste your next round.
Molitor 07-21-07, 02:37 AM	I can think of a myriad of reasons to counterspell; chiefly among them..1) you want to take your enemy hostage and not kill him ..2) your DCs are garbage compared to the opposition(DCs dont come into account in counterspelling)..3) you have more spells than the enemy and therefor just wish to run them dry...4) you have all the really nifty feats that make counterspelling badass!..5) you are in close combat and a preemptive strike with any area of effect spell would hurt your side as much as the opposition...6) You can counterspell the enemy's helpful spells.
runestar 07-21-07, 03:49 AM	In an epic game, I might have an epic spellcaster, such as the elder titan take epic counterspell (as the feat in the epic insights article). This way, he can effectively lockdown all the spellcasters in the party while beating down on the fighters, while squeezing out a quickened spell or 2 each round.:)
stuporhero93 07-21-07, 11:37 AM	Yes but with creative counterspelling, things get interesting. Light of Lumia, for example, was countered by globe of darkness. The bolts, kept coming, but were now dealing negative energy damage. The undead controlled by the drow cleric were now healed instead of hurt :D
FRRC 07-21-07, 12:27 PM	Stops your team being toasted by an enemy fireball.
was_fired 07-21-07, 07:05 PM	With creative counterspells vs the system as written it actually becomes useful from the sound of it, but even then it needs a slight boost most of the time. Also, FRRC as it was pointed out before it doesn't stop the enemy from casting a fireball well. Readying an action to fireball him when he casts a fireball does a better job AND it ends up using exactly as many resources.