This is a spot to continue discussion of counterspelling. I have suggested it be made a class ability that is an "attack of opportunity" triggered by an opponent casting within your range.
If he recognizes and knows the spell, countering is automatic as long as he uses a slot of the same or higher level.
In cases where the mage does not recognize or does not know the spell being cast he can still attempt it, using a DC of the opponent's spell DC + 5 - (counterspeller's level + ability bonus). Using a higher slot than needed reduces the DC by 1 per level higher.
Counterspell uses any spell slot the wizard has of the appropriate level. Even if he has the exact spell memorized, he does not have to lose that spell, he can choose another.
(These numbers are just a place to start. I have not done any analysis, this is on the fly)
A mage in a hurry could even not prepare spells in slots and still use them to counterspell (That would have to be a rough morning!)
OK, take your shots.
|
Taken altogether, your proposed changes would *radically* improve the counterspell action.
Considering that it's all-but worthless, and often needs one or more feats (some non-core) and / or some sort of prestige class feature enhancement to even be *kinda* useful, perhaps a 'radical' improvement is exactly what is needed...
I'm very fond of the 'counterspell of opportunity' idea, but not so much of the 'any spell at all to counterspell' option. Perhaps a Universalist would have to use the exact spell (or Dispel Magic or Greater Dispel Magic), while a Specialist could use *any* spell of his specialty school (of equal or higher level) to counter any other spell of that school. Evokers would then be the best at defusing incoming Fireballs (since they could use any 3rd level or better Evocation to do so), while Enchanters would be the best at waving off incoming Charm Monsters.
Alternately, perhaps a Specialist can use any spell of their school (of appropriate level) without penalty to counter a spell, and for non-specialized schools, and for *all schools* for non-specialist wizards, they get a significant penalty to the opposed caster level check to Counterspell if using a spell other than the one needed (or Dispel Magic, which always works). -4 or -5 to the roll would be a significant penalty, for the Wizard who doesn't have the necessary spell handy, and the Wizard or Sorcerer might be utterly incapable of Counterspelling a spell that isn't in his Spellbook (or among his Spells Known, giving Sorcerers a serious restriction for Counterspelling, compared to Wizards, under this system!).
Other thoughts;
1) Burning a higher level spell to counter a spell should provide a bonus. Even if it's only a +1 to the opposed caster level check for each spell level by which the spell exceeds the level of the spell being countered, it's something, and would encourage a spellcaster to blow one of his bigger spells if he *really* wants a chance to counter that enemy spell.
2) Over in the necromancy thread, someone proposed that necromancers be able to 'uncreate' undead using Animate Dead (or, presumably, the appropriate Create Undead spells for non-skeleton/zombies), essentially 'counterspelling' a spell that may have been cast years ago.
This might be an interesting thing to ponder as a Specialist feature, the ability to 'counterspell' even spells that have been around for awhile, by using the appropriate spell to counter it. So a Conjuror might be able to 'counterspell' a Wall of Iron by expending his own Wall of Iron (or perhaps only Conjuration spell of equal or higher level) to get a chance to 'unravel' it.
I really like the counterspell of opportunity part of this idea.
I think just adding that would fix most of the counterspelling problems. It makes Improved Counterspell much more worthwhile, and one feat is not much to ask for the power that it would give.
I don't think allowing just any spell of appropriate level would be a great idea, except maybe in the case of an abjuration specialist, say to replace his current eighth level ability.
|
|
I don't think allowing just any spell of appropriate level would be a great idea, except maybe in the case of an abjuration specialist, say to replace his current eighth level ability.
Oh, good point. Abjurers should *totally* be the counterspell zen masters. Your wizard should find out he's dueling Abby the Abjurer and just cry and cry, wondering if he can buy some poison and just stab the blue-denial-deck-waving wench to death...
Well as another player puts it:
"Abjurers are never popular, while all the other wizards are off breaking the rules of physics we are the school of "NO", and people don't like to be told no."
This is a spot to continue discussion of counterspelling. I have suggested it be made a class ability that is an "attack of opportunity" triggered by an opponent casting within your range.
If he recognizes and knows the spell, countering is automatic as long as he uses a slot of the same or higher level.
In cases where the mage does not recognize or does not know the spell being cast he can still attempt it, using a DC of the opponent's spell DC + 5 - (counterspeller's level + ability bonus). Using a higher slot than needed reduces the DC by 1 per level higher.Counterspell uses any spell slot the wizard has of the appropriate level. Even if he has the exact spell memorized, he does not have to lose that spell, he can choose another.
(These numbers are just a place to start. I have not done any analysis, this is on the fly)
A mage in a hurry could even not prepare spells in slots and still use them to counterspell (That would have to be a rough morning!)
OK, take your shots.
I think i like the idea. But...
1) what exactly do you mean by "...triggered by an opponent casting within your range" ? More specific range: the range of the enemy spell? the range of your counterspell?
2) I think countering without regard to the counterspell used in addition to automatically countering the spell is way too powerful. I would limit this to "the same school". I would also make a check with a modifier dependent on the level of the counterspell uses in relation to the enemy spell.
3) how many opportunity-counterspells are allowed per round? I assume 1 per round (when not having a specific feat such as the magic-equivalent of combat reflexes)
4) i guess opportunity-counterspelling is not allowed when you are flat-footed (as are opportunity attacks normally)
I agree counterspelling could use a boost, but I am concerned about numerous potential counter checks being made by PCs and NPCs every round.
I don't think it will be anymore than the number of Attacks of Opportunity taken each round. How many casters do you run on both sides? Or just limit each person to 1 a round like attacks of opportunity...
Heck make it an attack of opportunity!
I posted in the other thread, but since this is getting thread of its own I'll say it again. I really like this idea. I think it brings several merits to the table.
1. Spellcasters become more self-balancing. This gives the other classes more of a chance to shine.
2. Counterspelling becomes more strategic. Resource management is a bigger deal when you have the potential to blow two spells per round one offensively and one defensively. It also informs when and how you might use magic since you'll want to use your spells when they have the best chance of getting through. You now have a situation where you can try to bait counters and such. There really is some amazing potential here.
3. Countering actually becomes worth the effort, instead of the useless thing it is now.
|
|
1. Spellcasters become more self-balancing. This gives the other classes more of a chance to shine.
2. Counterspelling becomes more strategic. Resource management is a bigger deal when you have the potential to blow two spells per round one offensively and one defensively. It also informs when and how you might use magic since you'll want to use your spells when they have the best chance of getting through. You now have a situation where you can try to bait counters and such. There really is some amazing potential here.
3. Countering actually becomes worth the effort, instead of the useless thing it is now.
All awesome reasons to go with this. Certain encounter types will need a little re-balancing. (Parties against single spellcasters, such as liches, for instance, since the parties casters could try to just shut down everything he casts while the fighter-types beat him to death, but this can be adjusted for in various ways.)
The thematic 'feel' of wizards being able to shut each other down like this is just awesome. It has a very 'battle of wills' / spell-duel feel, and I really, really like that.
[Granted the media example that came immediately to mind was Egg Shen and Lo Pan fighting at the end of Big Trouble in Little China, which casts it in a funny light....]
Seeing what was here, I put together some ideas about how counterspelling might work, and some feats that would extend from this. Note that in these terms effective spell level = spell level from metamagic feats plus base spell level, plus any effects given outside of this. For example, Widened Fireball cast by an evoker is effective spell level 5. This has not been playtested, I just wanted to hear thoughts on this.
Counterspelling (new)
A counterspell now acts as an AoO that a caster can use to keep a spell from happening, and may do as many counterspells in this way as the wizard as AoO. Whenever a caster casts a spell, you may do a spellcraft check (DC 10+ enemy caster lvl + effective spell level of the spell). If you have this spell readied (or as a known spell) or if this is true for a spell that dispels given spell (i.e Haste and Slow, Dispel Magic), you may use an AoO to counterspell. If the enemy's spell is affected by metamagic, your spell must be the same effective level (for example, a widened fireball can be used to counter a reach fireball, but a fireball cannot). Also, the spell must come from the same source of magic (i.e. A bard would need to make a check to counterspell a cleric's cure light wounds, even if he knew the spell). If one of the above were not true, you may attempt to use any spell to counterspell. Both casters need to make opposed caster checks, with the person using the higher effective level spell as a bonus to their caster check equal to the difference in level of spells. If the schools of the spells do not match, the counterspeller takes a -5 penalty on his caster level check. If the spells are of the same school and subschool(i.e. Summon Monster III countered by another conjuration(summoning), the counterspeller gains a +2 bonus on his caster level check. If one caster is arcane, and the other is divine, the counterspeller takes an additional -5 penatly to counterspell. If the counterspeller wins the opposed check, the original spell has no effect. Otherwise, the spell acts as normal. In any case both casters lose that prepared spell or spell slot as if they had casted the spell.
Special: Specialist wizards treat their spells of their specialty schools as one level higher, including for the effective level of the spell needed to counterspell without a caster level check, for purposes of the difficulty of identifying, counterspelling, and resisting counterspelling with spells of that school. The spells of these wizards are treated as 2 levels lower in all cases for prohibited schools.
Feat: Improved Counterspell (general)
If you counterspell with a spell that is not of the same school as the target spell, you do not take the -5 penalty on your caster level check.
Feat: Fortify Spell(metamagic)
A spell with this metamagic is treated as 2 levels higher with respect to counterspelling and resisting counterspells for every level that this spell is higher than normal. This feat must increase the spell level by at least 1, even if other feats or other class features would otherwise reduce this cost to 0.
Feat: Counterspell master(general)
Prerequisites: Combat Reflexes, Improved Counterspell, Counterspell Adept, caster level 9th
First, you gain a number of AoO equal to your dex mod +1 that can only be used to counterspell. Second, if you fail to counterspell, you do not lose that spell if you can succeed on a spellcraft check (DC 20 + spell level used + 2*the amount you failed the opposed caster check by). Third, you can treat a spell that has the same school and subschool as an identical spell for the purposes of counterspelling an enemies spell. If a spell doesn't have a subschool, you gain no benefit with this feat. Finally, you may use an AoO to aid another caster within close range (as per close range spells) to resist a counterspell or to counterspell an enemy. If the caster you are aiding would be automatically counterspelled, the one you aid can resist with a caster level check at a -10 penalty. Otherwise, your caster level check (with the same modifiers as the one you are aiding other than using your own caster level) can be used to replace his or hers.
Feat:Counterspell defense(general)
Prerequisites: Improved Counterspell
If a spell of yours would be automatically counterspelled (usually by being of the same spell), you instead make an opposed caster level check with you taking a -5 penalty to resist the counterspell.
Feat: Counterspell adept(general)
Prerequisites: Improved Counterspell
You may take any spell slot that you have, and instead treat it as two spell slots of the same level. These spell slots, however, can only be used to counterspell. A caster who is non-spontaneous must still prepare spells in those slots to be able to be used for counterspells.
Counterspelling (new)
...Both casters need to make opposed caster checks, with the person using the higher effective level spell as a bonus to their caster check equal to the difference in level of spells. If the schools of the spells do not match, the counterspeller takes a -5 penalty on his caster level check. If the spells are of the same school and subschool(i.e. Summon Monster III countered by another conjuration(summoning), the counterspeller gains a +2 bonus on his caster level check. If one caster is arcane, and the other is divine, the counterspeller takes an additional -5 penatly to counterspell. If the counterspeller wins the opposed check, the original spell has no effect. Otherwise,...
I think that 3 rolls in all is too roll-intensive. Why not remove the opposed caster checks and simply let the counterspeller make one against a DC similar to a targeted Dispel Magic (DC 11 + the-be-countered-spell's caster level). Now add the modifiers to the DC as already mentioned including the difference in spell-levels. Means 1 roll less to do.
As to the number of counterspells to be used: a character has his normal allotment of AOO per round (normally 1 without combat expertise). Giving a spellcaster 1 opportunity for free (or even more with your Counterspell Master feat) seems unfair when compared to the number of AOO non-spellcasters. The solution would be to make make a counterspell a replacement option for an opportunity attack. In other words: you have X "opportunity action" per round and it doesn't matter if you choose to counterspell or to actually make an opportunity attack with a weapon when you take an opportunity action. You still get only one opportunity action per opportunity.
Counterspelling (new)
...Both casters need to make opposed caster checks, with the person using the higher effective level spell as a bonus to their caster check equal to the difference in level of spells. If the schools of the spells do not match, the counterspeller takes a -5 penalty on his caster level check. If the spells are of the same school and subschool(i.e. Summon Monster III countered by another conjuration(summoning), the counterspeller gains a +2 bonus on his caster level check. If one caster is arcane, and the other is divine, the counterspeller takes an additional -5 penatly to counterspell. If the counterspeller wins the opposed check, the original spell has no effect. Otherwise,...I think that 3 rolls in all is too roll-intensive. Why not remove the opposed caster checks and simply let the counterspeller make one against a DC similar to a targeted Dispel Magic (DC 11 + the-be-countered-spell's caster level). Now add the modifiers to the DC as already mentioned including the difference in spell-levels. Means 1 roll less to do.
As to the number of counterspells to be used: a character has his normal allotment of AOO per round (normally 1 without combat expertise). Giving a spellcaster 1 opportunity for free (or even more with your Counterspell Master feat) seems unfair when compared to the number of AOO non-spellcasters. The solution would be to make make a counterspell a replacement option for an opportunity attack. In other words: you have X "opportunity action" per round and it doesn't matter if you choose to counterspell or to actually make an opportunity attack with a weapon when you take an opportunity action. You still get only one opportunity action per opportunity.
1. That's a good point. I'm still thinking in 3.5 idea of opposed checks.
2. Nice catch. That is what I meant, I just worded it badly. Do you think that otherwise the extra AoO that can only be used to counterspell would be too much?
In this, here is a potential rewrite:
Counterspelling (new)
A counterspell now acts as an AoO that a caster can use to keep a spell from happening, and the counterspell uses an AoO. Whenever a caster casts a spell, you may do a spellcraft check (DC 10+ enemy caster lvl + effective spell level of the spell). If you have this spell readied (or as a known spell) or if this is true for a spell that dispels given spell (i.e Haste and Slow, Dispel Magic), you may use an AoO to counterspell. If the enemy's spell is affected by metamagic, your spell must be the same effective level (for example, a widened fireball can be used to counter a reach fireball, but a fireball cannot). Also, the spell must come from the same source of magic (i.e. A bard would need to make a check to counterspell a cleric's cure light wounds, even if he knew the spell). If one of the above were not true, you may attempt to use any spell to counterspell. The person using a counterspell needs to make a caster level check (DC= 11 + enemy caster level + enemy's effective spell level - counterspeller's effective spell level). If the schools of the spells do not match, the counterspeller takes a -5 penalty on his caster level check. If the spells are of the same school and subschool(i.e. Summon Monster III countered by another conjuration(summoning), the counterspeller gains a +2 bonus on his caster level check. If one caster is arcane, and the other is divine, the counterspeller takes an additional -5 penatly to counterspell. If the counterspeller beats the DC, the original spell has no effect. Otherwise, the spell acts as normal. In any case both casters lose that prepared spell or spell slot as if they had casted the spell.
...Do you think that otherwise the extra AoO that can only be used to counterspell would be too much?...
I think it would not unbalance much but I also think we must be aware to not "unbalance" the game by introducing many small things which will possibly result in some unbalance when taken as a whole, especially when the Counterspell Master feat and especially when "core rules" are concerned.
Otherwise looking good so far. I'll think about your proposal some more.
So, based on Kamai's info sofar and some fine-tuning on my part, I came up with this (hopefully I've not forgotten anything, so please inform me about possible loopholes):
I somewhat changed the Counterspell Master feat, because it seemed somewhat too complicated. I have to think harder about all the feats and their implmentation with the exception of Combat Expertise. Furthermore, why make it only aan arcane class ability? There are two possiblities:
1) Access for all true spellcasters: that is core classes with the ability to cast spells from 1st class level onward (bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, and wizard, but not Rangers or Paladins). This would also exclude all Prestige Classes.
2) Access for all spellcasters, making this a general rule.
I'm also not sure about the last sentence under "Counterspells - Provoking" starting with "Please note:". I'm rethinking about counter actions not generally provoking counter actions to not overcomplicate the matter. What you think?
Now to the rules:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Opportunity Actions
An opportunity action is a free action taken during an opponent's turn and used to make counterattack or to cast a counterspell. Regardless of what opportunity action you choose, you can only take one opportunity action per opportunity. You cannot take an opportunity action if you are flat-footed. You don’t have to take an opportunity action if you don’t want to.
An opportunity action interrupts the normal flow of actions in the round. If an opportunity action is taken, immediately resolve the opportunity action, then continue with the next combatant’s turn (or complete the current turn, if the opportunity action was provoked and taken in the midst of the combatant’s turn).
A combatant is normally allowed to take only 1 opportunity action per combat round. The Combat Reflex feat allows you to take more than one opportunity actions per round, but still only one opportunity action per opportunity.
Counterattack
In all regards, a counterattack is treated as an Attack of Opportunity.
Counterspells
Provoking
A counterspell can only be used as an opportunity action to counter an enemy spellcaster’s spell. Please note, that a counterspell may provoke an opportunity action from a third combatant which may interrupt the counterspell which means that with a successful interruption the enemy’s spellcaster’s will not be interrupted by your counterspell.
Automatic Success
Whenever an enemy caster casts a spell, you may do a Spellcraft check (DC 10+ enemy caster lvl + effective spell level of the spell) to identify the spell being cast. If you identified the spell and have this spell readied (or as a known spell) or if this is true for a spell that dispels a given spell (i.e Haste and Slow, Dispel Magic), you may use an opportunity action to automatically counterspell the enemy spell.
If the enemy's spell is affected by metamagic, your spell must be at least the same effective level (for example, a widened fireball can be used to counter a reach fireball, but a fireball cannot). Also, the spell must come from the same source of magic (i.e. a bard would need to make a check to counterspell a cleric's cure light wounds, even if he knew the spell).
Non-Automatic
If one of the above were not true counterspelling is not automatically successful but you may attempt to use any spell to counterspell and make a check: the person using a counterspell needs to make a caster level check (DC= 11 + enemy caster level + enemy's effective spell level - counterspeller's effective spell level + other applicable modifiers). If the counterspeller beats the DC, the original spell has no effect. Otherwise, the spell acts as normal.
General Rules
In any case both casters lose that prepared spell or spell slot as if they had casted the spell. Please note that the enemy spellcaster must be within range of your counterspell. A counterspell cannot be cast from a magic item (such as a scroll or wand).
Counterspell Modifiers
Situation Mod.
Schools do not match -5
Spell of same school and subschool +2
Type of magic does not match -5
Specialist (see below) special
Specialist Wizards
Specialist Wizards treat spells of their speciality schools as one level higher (including for the effective level of the spell needed to counterspell without a caster level check), for the purposes of the difficulty of identifying, counterspelling, and resisting counterspelling with spells of that school. The spells of these wizards are treated as two levels lower in all cases for prohibited schools.
Opportunity Feats
The following feats are related to Opportunity Actions:
Counterspell Adept
General
PREREQ : Improved Counterspell
BENEFIT: You may take any spell slot that you have and instead treat it as two spell slots of the same level. These spell slots, however, can only be used to counterspell. Anon-spontaneous caster must still prepare spells in those slots to be able to be used for counterspells.
Counterspell Master
General
PREREQ : Combat Reflexes, Improved Counterspell, Counterspell Adept, caster level 9th
BENEFIT: If you fail a non-automatic counterspell, you do not lose that spell if you fail your caster check. In addition, you can treat a spell that has the same school and subschool as an identical spell for the purpose of counterspelling an enemy spell. If a spell does not have a subschool, you gain no benefit with this feat. Finally, you may use a counterspell opportunity action to aid another caster within close range to resist a counterspell giving a +5 / -4 bonus / penalty to the caster check / DC.
Combat Reflexes (Rewrite)
General
PREREQ : -
BENEFIT: You may take a number of additional opportunity actions equal to your DEX-bonus. With this feat, you may also take opportunity actions while flat-footed.
NORMAL: A character without this feat can take only one opportunity action per round and can’t take opportunity actions while flat-footed..
SPECIAL: This feat does not allow a Rogue to use her Opportunitst ability more than once per round. A Fighter may select this feat as one of his Fighter bonus feats. A Monk may select this feat as a bonus feat at 2nd class level.
Improved Counterspell
General
PREREQ : -
BENEFIT: If you counterspell with a spell that is not of the same school as the target spell, you do not take the -5 penalty on your caster level check.
NORMAL: You take a -5 penalty on your caster level check when using a spell not of the same school as the spell to be countered.
Fortify Spell
Metamagic
PREREQ : -
BENEFIT: A spell enhanced with this metamagic feat is treated as 2 levels higher with respect to counterspelling and resisting counterspells for every level that this spell is higher than normal.
SPECIAL: This feat must increase the spell level by at least 1, even if other feats or class features would otherwise reduce this cost to 0.
-------------------------------------------------------------
I thought I would put up my own take on a potential rules system.
If a spell is cast within line of sight and effect of you, you may attempt a counterspelling action if you have an avaiable attack of opportunity. Using a counterspelling action uses up an attack of opportunity may only be attempted 1/round no matter how many attacks of opportunity you may have available.
First make a spellcraft check to see what information you have to attempt a counterspell. Because it is difficult to fight and observe the intricacies of spellcasting the DC is 20+spell level. If you suceed you know the level of the spell being cast, if you beat it by 5 or more you know the exact spell being cast. If a spell has been modified by the silent or still metamagic feats add 5 to the DC for each one applicable. This information informs how you proceed.
In order to counter you need to suceed on a caster level check. The base DC of which is your opponents caster level. The DC is modified by the following.
For every level greater your opponents spell is than your counter add 10 to the DC.
For every level greater your counter is than the opponent's spell subtract 10
If the source of magic is different (i.e. divine vs arcane) add 5 to the DC
Specialist suffer a -5 to caster level checks against spells from their banned school, but gain +5 on caster level checks against spells from their school specialization. Abjurer's are an exception to this rule and simply gain +5 to all caster level checks made regarding counterspelling.
If you chose to counterspell as a ready action you more carefully observe your opponent. The spellcraft check is DC 10+spell level to identify the level of the spell, if you beat it by 5 or more you know the exact spell. You also add 5 to your caster level check to counter since you've given up other actions to be ready to counter.
Counterspelling provokes an attack of opportunity.
Spells modified by metamagic are treated as their original level for purposes of determining the DC to counter, the exception to this is Heighten Spell which causes the spell to be treated as whatever level it has been modified to.
Spells cast faster than a standard action cannot be countered.
Spells that specifically counter other affects such as haste and slow are always successful no caster level check necessary.
Example 1: Your rival the wizard Castus begins to cast a spell (fireball). Because you've been actively involved in combat rather than waiting to make a move the spellcraft DC is 23. You roll a total of 20 on your spellcraft check, not good enough, but you know your party can't take much more so you try to counter it anyway. You sacrifice the highest level spell you have left (2nd) to counter and hope it's enough. The DM sets the DC in secret, Castus is 5th level but his spell is one level higher than your counter, so the DM adds +10 for a DC of 15. You make a casterlevel check with a result of 16, you were lucky and Castus' spell fizzels.
Example 2: You've finally confronted the powerful cleric Mallus. Your abjurer decides he cannot let him bring his formidable magic to bare and so readies an action to counterspell him. Mallus begins to call on the power of his dark god (casting flame strike). You beat the DC15 spellcraft check with a 23 and realize what he is about to cast. You sacrifice one of your highest level spells to try to stop him. The DM sets the DC in secret, Mallus is 10th level and a different type of magic and is using a spell 1 level higher than your counter. 10+5+10=DC25. You make your caster level check to try to stop him. You're a 7th level abjurer who readied an action so you roll. 1d20+7+5+5. Unfortunately you only roll a 5 for a total of 22 and unholy fire rains down on your party.
Now I think I've managed to make this sound more complicated than it actually is. Determining checks and DC's shouldn't really take any longer than the current countering system. That said it would slow things down a little because it will come up more more often.
If you have multiple PC casters at the table you may have to run the sequence like this. If they want to counter have them pick a spell they'll use. Have them roll the spellcraft check. Anyone that fails, give them the option of sticking with that spell or giving up on the counter. Anyone that passed give them the information and let them reevaluate thier spell choice if they want, and then proceed from there. This would prevent anyone from acting on information their character doesn't have.
It scales both on relative levels of the casters and the resources they're willing to devote. Equal level casters with equal level spells cancel each other out, but the more the level and resource gap widens the more pronounced it becomes.
From whence came the Divine inferiority at counterspelling?
I thought they were already at a slight disadvantage with the Spellcraft mechanic... but why shouldn't they be able to counterspell as well as Arcane casters?
*Maaaahhhh* Why can't i edit my own post? Because it is tooo old? *Grrr*
Now to the rules:
-------------------------------------------------------------
I also tend to make this a general ruling and limit it to a class feature only available to arcane spellcasters.
Add to the rules:
Counterspelling is not limited to arcane casters and is not a special class feature but a general rule.
Also change the Non-Automatic section to:
-------------------------------------------------------------
If one of the above were not true counterspelling is not automatically successful but you may attempt to use any spell to counterspell and make a check: the person using a counterspell needs to make a caster level check (DC= 15 + enemy caster level + enemy's effective spell level - counterspeller's effective spell level + other applicable modifiers), except for when using DISPEL MAGIC (because it already comes with a - lower - check) If the counterspeller beats the DC, the original spell has no effect. Otherwise, the spell acts as normal.
-------------------------------------------------------------
I think this is important: the DC is higher because of Dispel Magic which should not loose its potential.
This is a great idea, but I think ii departs from 3.5 too much. Why don't you just make it so you can counterspell once per round as an attack of opportunity if you make a successful spellcraft check and have the exact same spell (or the spell with the same levels worth of metemagic)to automatically counterspell. There is no need for the other counterspelling rules. Also, you can use dispel magic as your counterspell but you must make the check as descried in the spell's description. This way, dispel magic is not made obsolete, casters won't be countered every single round, counterspelling will be very useful, and sorcerers will be much more powerful (now they can keep their crappy spell progression at even levels and I won't feel bad for them).
*Maaaahhhh* Why can't i edit my own post? Because it is tooo old? *Grrr*
Now to the rules:
-------------------------------------------------------------
I also tend to make this a general ruling and limit it to a class feature only available to arcane spellcasters.
Add to the rules:
Counterspelling is not limited to arcane casters and is not a special class feature but a general rule.
Also change the Non-Automatic section to:
-------------------------------------------------------------
If one of the above were not true counterspelling is not automatically successful but you may attempt to use any spell to counterspell and make a check: the person using a counterspell needs to make a caster level check (DC= 15 + enemy caster level + enemy's effective spell level - counterspeller's effective spell level + other applicable modifiers), except for when using DISPEL MAGIC (because it already comes with a - lower - check) If the counterspeller beats the DC, the original spell has no effect. Otherwise, the spell acts as normal.
-------------------------------------------------------------I think this is important: the DC is higher because of Dispel Magic which should not loose its potential.
I don't see the DC needing to be increased because Dispel Magic can ignore all of the modifiers. Dispel Magic can take out higher level spells at the same DC without increasing it's level, and can also take out spells from another magic source without an increase in DC. DCs can get ugly really quickly if the other caster does not have an equlivalent school ready to him or trying to counterspell a divine caster. For example, say you're a 5th level wizard trying to counterspell a 5th level cleric using flamestrike. Now if you don't have an evocation spell handy, the DC is 26 (11 + CL 5 + 5 for different types of magic + 5 for different schools) while dispel magic has a DC of 16. This is for a 3 level spell, and the DC would stay the same, even if there are other effects to increase the effective spell level of the target spell. Dispel Magic has its uses without feat usage, which seems fair enough. Counterspelling at this point can not take out affects that are already in play, so Dispel doesn't lose its use. The intent was that counterspelling was available to any character that was able to cast spells.
Also, counterspells definitely should not provoke more counterspells, though it can provoke other opportunity actions, but should still be subject to the same concentration rules as casting the spell normally (i.e. if there was a readied action, or continuous damage).
I'll admit that I was trying to do too much with one feat with counterspell mastery. However, I think automatically holding on to the spell is too much. Even with these feats, there should not necessarily be no penalty for failing the counterspell. I think that would make it too easy for casters to shut each other down for long periods of time. Thus, why the original one had a tough spellcraft check to do so.
An interesting thought that came to mind is trying to counterspell a sizable spell with cantrips. If you use, say, ray of frost to counterspell a fireball, the DC is only 14 + caster level. Being able to have a chance to stop any spell at will is just too much. Maybe it should be added that a 0th level spell cannot be used to counterspell except against an identical spell.
|
There's already a way to counterspell as an immediate action:
Reactive Counterspelling, from Player's Guide to Forgotten Realms (3.5)
Prereq: Improved Initiative, Improved Counterspell
It's an expensive feat to take, but it is a wonderful PC concept. Especially for, say, Merlin-like royal wizard advisors who go around following, say, King Azoun IV and other Royals/Nobles/VIPs. Makes a kickass path for a wizard cohort as well, if you're, say, a high-level fighter with Leadership feat...
While I applaud your efforts on tweaking the existing counterspelling mechanics, well, I like them just the way they are thank you, and I don't think we should collectively expect Paizo to come up with a cheat or way around duplicating everything published in WotC's non-OGL products in the last freaggin' 5 years... I still plan to use all the 3.5 WotC junk I bought, and I'd like Paizo to stick to the Core/DMG class improvements, and stay low on the actual game mechanics changes.
My two coppers, of course....
While I don't disagree that paizo shouldn't be copying everything WotC has done, this was grown organically in the forums here as a way to improve counterspelling on a whole, and lessen (without nerfing) a spellcaster's impact on the higher level play.
The feats and complete alternate systems aren't really needed I think, just allowing counterspell as an AoO would be enough.
Beyond that there is the age old problem of "Core only" or "Books out of print" later when 3.5 has gotten older and paizo is still going strong.
You say it should be used as an attack of opportunity, but do you think it should require a spellcraft check to identify.
Otherwise, I agree with you.
Yeah I don't think it should be any different other than you don't have to ready an action, you just use an attack of opportunity instead.
Heck since you are casting a spell to counter a spell you might even provoke another attack of opportunity against yourself: What's more important? Not provoking from the orge beside you, or countering that incoming fireball?
Identifying a spell as it is being cast is a free action anyways, I often identify as they cast to see if I should use a quickened "bubble" spell (resilient sphere) to defend myself or not.
Well these new rules look really interesting and are much more akin to what countering should like.
But if you guys want it to be popular and pontially in the book, streamline and simple.
And if you were wanting abjurationist to be better at give them a speical feat for it or something.
Just clean and simple is how people like, you don't want another grapple.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Me likey.
Maybe simplify it in rather than calling it an AoO that doesn't quite act like an AoO.
Counterspell: As an Immediate action that can provoke an attack of oportunity, your character may attempt to counter a spell with either dispel magic or the spell the person is casting. The spellcraft check is part of this action.
<insert mechanic used to resolve here>
This way you're trading your swift action from this round or next round, for a chance to shut down one spell.
Make a feat to allow the 'of the same school equal or greater level' and allow the Abjurer to essentially blow any prepared spell to counter. That way you can make a dedicated counterspeller, or you can still have the abjurer as the 'master of NO'.
Counterspell: As an Immediate action that can provoke an attack of oportunity, your character may attempt to counter a spell with either dispel magic or the spell the person is casting. The spellcraft check is part of this action.
I can only agree with this. In my campaign, I'm currently playtesting the Counterspell as an Immediate action; time will tell if my choice was underpowered, overpowered, or simply right.
It strange for me that, since the birth of the "Swift Action" and the "Immediate Action", nobody has (at least) tried to officially "fix" the least-used rule of the entire 3.x system... (in 8 years of 3.x, at my table, I've NEVER - wait, perhaps once or twice IN TOTAL - seen Counterspell in action, RAW)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
It strange for me that, since the birth of the "Swift Action" and the "Immediate Action", nobody has (at least) tried to officially "fix" the least-used rule of the entire 3.x system... (in 8 years of 3.x, at my table, I've NEVER - wait, perhaps once or twice IN TOTAL - seen Counterspell in action, RAW)
In my experience, damage is much better.
I can try to dispel the spell with a readied action to throw dispel magic. Or I can ready an orb of force so I a) still have to make a d20 roll, and b) get to smack him for damage as well. 10d6 orb will average roughly 35 points of damage, plus cause a DC 45 concentration check.
So Counterspell has to be more attractive, an immediate action does that.
Amusing story, I tagged a cleric with the OoF and a crit. He survived the 65 points of damage, but the look on the DM's face when I said "Yeah, it's a DC 75 for that Flame Strike he was throwing."
Exactly what all my players (and myself) think about Counterspell. How it's currently written, it's simply not worth the effort of a wasted action (you MUST wait to do anything - instead of crippling/ burning/ killing instantly your foes; you MUST recognize the spell - which at medium and high levels is almost a joke, and so a waste of time and dice rolls; and you MUST have the exact spell to vanish it - which is almost foolish with the Core spells only, and practically impossible with SplatMania)
(or perhaps, you go for Greater Dispel Magic and at least TRY to counter it)
(or you burn your higher spells like there is no tomorrow with the Improved Counterspell - "Wait ! He's casting Ghoul's Touch! Time to go with Enervation (...)")
Simply not worth it.
It strange for me that, since the birth of the "Swift Action" and the "Immediate Action", nobody has (at least) tried to officially "fix" the least-used rule of the entire 3.x system... (in 8 years of 3.x, at my table, I've NEVER - wait, perhaps once or twice IN TOTAL - seen Counterspell in action, RAW)In my experience, damage is much better.
I can try to dispel the spell with a readied action to throw dispel magic. Or I can ready an orb of force so I a) still have to make a d20 roll, and b) get to smack him for damage as well. 10d6 orb will average roughly 35 points of damage, plus cause a DC 45 concentration check.
So Counterspell has to be more attractive, an immediate action does that.
Amusing story, I tagged a cleric with the OoF and a crit. He survived the 65 points of damage, but the look on the DM's face when I said "Yeah, it's a DC 75 for that Flame Strike he was throwing."
If you only change it to an immediate action and still keep the current rules of having to either match the spell or use dispel then you end up where you might counter more, but it will be pretty incidental. If you're intent on stopping them from casting you're still better off to save the spell and ready an action to smack them if they do anything. The chances of having the right spell, or passing a dispel check really aren't that good.
|
While making it an immediate action (or AoO action) would be a great improvement, I still don't think anyone would ever bother to use counter-spelling as long as it requires the use of a precisely matching spell (or dispel magic's, which could generally be used more productively).
Here's an idea for another improvement:
At every spell level, create a new spell call Counterspell I-IX in the Abjuration school. These spells can only be used as counters, but can counter any spell of equal or lower level. Simplify the countering rules such that, when you attempt a counter a spell, the original caster has to make a caster level check (perhaps influenced by the difference between the level of their spell and the level of your counterspell?) to keep the spell from fizzling.
Basically, I'd like to be able to play a dedicated dispeller. It's a character I've wanted to play for a while, but the rules don't really allow for it as long as I have to try to guess what spells my opponents will be using.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
While making it an immediate action (or AoO action) would be a great improvement, I still don't think anyone would ever bother to use counter-spelling as long as it requires the use of a precisely matching spell (or dispel magic's, which could generally be used more productively).
Here's an idea for another improvement:
At every spell level, create a new spell call Counterspell I-IX in the Abjuration school. These spells can only be used as counters, but can counter any spell of equal or lower level. Simplify the countering rules such that, when you attempt a counter a spell, the original caster has to make a caster level check (perhaps influenced by the difference between the level of their spell and the level of your counterspell?) to keep the spell from fizzling.
Basically, I'd like to be able to play a dedicated dispeller. It's a character I've wanted to play for a while, but the rules don't really allow for it as long as I have to try to guess what spells my opponents will be using.
Not a bad idea. I rather like it.
While making it an immediate action (or AoO action) would be a great improvement, I still don't think anyone would ever bother to use counter-spelling as long as it requires the use of a precisely matching spell (or dispel magic's, which could generally be used more productively).
Here's an idea for another improvement:
At every spell level, create a new spell call Counterspell I-IX in the Abjuration school. These spells can only be used as counters, but can counter any spell of equal or lower level. Simplify the countering rules such that, when you attempt a counter a spell, the original caster has to make a caster level check (perhaps influenced by the difference between the level of their spell and the level of your counterspell?) to keep the spell from fizzling.
Basically, I'd like to be able to play a dedicated dispeller. It's a character I've wanted to play for a while, but the rules don't really allow for it as long as I have to try to guess what spells my opponents will be using.
O Gods! That is a GREAT idea.
Ganks!
I do not agree that allowing the normal counterspells as an immediate action or attack of opportunity will rarely be used. However, it will rarely be used by wizards. A sorcerer can spontaneously cast whatever their spell is to counter as long as it is on their spells known. For wizards, it would be basicallu useless, so i would make an abjurer special ability to make any abjuration spell a counterspell for any lower level spell.
I have always like the way they have counterspelled in novels and stuff. Which i know this is not a good example to pull from for building game mechanics.
But The idea of making more dispel magics ....called counterspells 1 to 9 is a great idea ....so effectly counterspell 3 is the old dispel magic.....Casting time a standard acion.
they need to have more abjuration spells...spellshields that casters can put up and used as a move, swift, or free action, something balancing, to help protect the caster from incoming spells. So the spellcaster can spend a round putting up some defenses and not just have to stand there and wait...each round to counter spell.
and if you put a good during on such spells then they could be useful between short time between fights.
|
|
At every spell level, create a new spell call Counterspell I-IX in the Abjuration school. These spells can only be used as counters, but can counter any spell of equal or lower level. Simplify the countering rules such that, when you attempt a counter a spell, the original caster has to make a caster level check (perhaps influenced by the difference between the level of their spell and the level of your counterspell?) to keep the spell from fizzling.
Given that a Dispel Magic has basically a 50/50 chance of 'getting it done,' I'd want a dedicated counterspell that has no other function to have a higher chance of success. (Dispel Magic also have fun features like being able to shut down a dozen buffs in one cast, or neutralize a magic item for 1d4 rounds, for instance.) Perhaps the bonus chance of success could be based off of the casters Intelligence (or Wisdom or Charisma, for non-Wizards), so that a 16 Int Wizard would get +3 to his caster level check to counter a spell?
But yeah, this would be cool.
On the other hand, if I were playing a dedicated Abjurer, I'd rather have this as a class ability, and be able to make *any* Abjuration spell function as a counterspell, rather than prepare a spell-list for the day that reads;
1st level - Counterspell 1 x3,
2nd level - Counterspell II x2,
3rd level - Counsterspell III.
'Cause that sounds kinda dull.
Let the other casters have the scaling 'Counterspell' spell which can be prepared in any spell slot from 1st to 9th, and then functions to counterspell any spell of that level or lower (with a bonus +1 to effect spells of lower level, so that a caster using a 4th level counterspell slot to counter a 2nd level spell has +2 to that caster level check).
The Counterspell spell itself should be an immediate action, as well, just to make it worth the while.
|
|
Given that a Dispel Magic has basically a 50/50 chance of 'getting it done,' I'd want a dedicated counterspell that has no other function to have a higher chance of success. (Dispel Magic also have fun features like being able to shut down a dozen buffs in one cast, or neutralize a magic item for 1d4 rounds, for instance.) Perhaps the bonus chance of success could be based off of the casters Intelligence (or Wisdom or Charisma, for non-Wizards), so that a 16 Int Wizard would get +3 to his caster level check to counter a spell?
I was just thinking of making the DC fairly high. 15 + your caster level + Counterspell level? 20 + your stat + Counterspell level? Either would have the beneficial effect of a) making it only one roll rather than two, and b) making it more likely to succeed than a generic Dispel Magic.
On the other hand, if I were playing a dedicated Abjurer, I'd rather have this as a class ability, and be able to make *any* Abjuration spell function as a counterspell, rather than prepare a spell-list for the day that reads;
1st level - Counterspell 1 x3,
2nd level - Counterspell II x2,
3rd level - Counsterspell III.
What about allowing counterspell substitution for abjurers, like cure spells for clerics and nature's allies for druids? I have no idea how to balance that out, though.
Let the other casters have the scaling 'Counterspell' spell which can be prepared in any spell slot from 1st to 9th, and then functions to counterspell any spell of that level or lower (with a bonus +1 to effect spells of lower level, so that a caster using a 4th level counterspell slot to counter a 2nd level spell has +2 to that caster level check).The Counterspell spell itself should be an immediate action, as well, just to make it worth the while.
Agreed on both of these.
Could just give it a static failure chance. Like say 15 or 20%, Abjurers 10%. I guess the trick is to figure out what the break point is to make it worthwhile to prepare a spell that is totally reactionary and requires you to be fighting a spellcaster for it not to be a wasted slot rather than something you're guaranteed to get some milage out of.
|
|
What about allowing counterspell substitution for abjurers, like cure spells for clerics and nature's allies for druids? I have no idea how to balance that out, though.
That works.
Given the reactive and limited nature of counterspelling anyway (many beasties use non-counterable SLAs, many, many more use pointy claws, slavering maws and sharp weapons to 'make their point'), I wouldn't see that as overpowered at all as a Specialist ability for Abjurers.
The Abjurer already has a very small spell-list, with one of the most popular 'abjuration' spells, the one that the Abjurant Champion is based around, being Mage Armor, a *conjuration* spell!
Turning an Abjurer into a one-man spellcaster-stopping-machine doesn't strike me as unbalanced in the least, particularly when any single threat CR-appropriate challenge is going to have access to a few spells outside of his ability to counter (being higher level than the PCs). The only time he's going to be able to 'shut down' an enemy spellcaster is going to be when that spellcaster was his CR or lower, and he'll expend a spell for every spell he counters, making it an even trade off of his resources against encounter resources. Assuming multiple encounters a day, he'll *still* end up behind. Assuming encounters that have monsters that use physical attacks, spell-like abilities and / or supernatural abilities, he'll be no more or less effective than any other wizard, and the requirement to fill his spell list with Abjuration spells to be able to Spontaneously counterspell with will ensure that he's not going to be flinging around the Hastes and Black Tentacles and other staples with as much abandon as another wizard.
|
|
That works.Given the reactive and limited nature of counterspelling anyway (many beasties use non-counterable SLAs, many, many more use pointy claws, slavering maws and sharp weapons to 'make their point'), I wouldn't see that as overpowered at all as a Specialist ability for Abjurers.
The Abjurer already has a very small spell-list, with one of the most popular 'abjuration' spells, the one that the Abjurant Champion is based around, being Mage Armor, a *conjuration* spell!
Turning an Abjurer into a one-man spellcaster-stopping-machine doesn't strike me as unbalanced in the least, particularly when any single threat CR-appropriate challenge is going to have access to a few spells outside of his ability to counter (being higher level than the PCs). The only time he's going to be able to 'shut down' an enemy spellcaster is going to be when that spellcaster was his CR or lower, and he'll expend a spell for every spell he counters, making it an even trade off of his resources against encounter resources. Assuming multiple encounters a day, he'll *still* end up behind. Assuming encounters that have monsters that use physical attacks, spell-like abilities and / or supernatural abilities, he'll be no more or less effective than any other wizard, and the requirement to fill his spell list with Abjuration spells to be able to Spontaneously counterspell with will ensure that he's not going to be flinging around the Hastes and Black Tentacles and other staples with as much abandon as another wizard.
Agreed. (And blatantly bumping in the hopes that Jason notices this ;-) )
Given the reactive and limited nature of counterspelling anyway (many beasties use non-counterable SLAs, many, many more use pointy claws, slavering maws and sharp weapons to 'make their point'), I wouldn't see that as overpowered at all as a Specialist ability for Abjurers.
The Abjurer already has a very small spell-list, with one of the most popular 'abjuration' spells, the one that the Abjurant Champion is based around, being Mage Armor, a *conjuration* spell!
Turning an Abjurer into a one-man spellcaster-stopping-machine doesn't strike me as unbalanced in the least, particularly when any single threat CR-appropriate challenge is going to have access to a few spells outside of his ability to counter (being higher level than the PCs). The only time he's going to be able to 'shut down' an enemy spellcaster is going to be when that spellcaster was his CR or lower, and he'll expend a spell for every spell he counters, making it an even trade off of his resources against encounter resources. Assuming multiple encounters a day, he'll *still* end up behind. Assuming encounters that have monsters that use physical attacks, spell-like abilities and / or supernatural abilities, he'll be no more or less effective than any other wizard, and the requirement to fill his spell list with Abjuration spells to be able to Spontaneously counterspell with will ensure that he's not going to be flinging around the Hastes and Black Tentacles and other staples with as much abandon as another wizard.
Great idea, and great thread in general. The idea of making counterspells more relevant to combat is long overdue, and the idea of making abjurers the masters of counterspelling provides an interesting way of differentiating them from the other school specialists.
Add me to the list of people in favor of:
1) Increasing the use of counterspells, however that happens (though I am really liking the AoO concepts discussed above)
2) Grants abjurers extra ability to (or improved ability to) counterspell
|
|
Even if we don't see any of this stuff ported over to the core counterspell rules or the core Abjurer specialist (which I'd kind of prefer), it occurs to me that this might make for a pretty awesome new class of it's own, an even-more-specialized 'abjurer,' just as the Dread Necromancer was kind of an 'even more' necromancer.
Class abilities could include the above counterspelling options, the ability to 'shield other' as an immediate action once / round (lasting 1 round) by shifting magical energies around like some sort of greatly improved magical version of Aid Other, etc.
There have been plenty of variations on the Necromancer as a core class (ranging from the Death Master to the Dread Necromancer to the Necromancer class in Zeb Cook and Wolfgang Bauers Secret College of Necromancy), and it could be cool to see some of the lesser-used schools like Abjuration (and Divination) get a little more love.
Personally I'd like to go back to how 1E had the separate Illusionist class but do that for all specialist classes. Then, I'd also like to move certain spells into those classes spell lists only. For example, move Major Image (and other high level illusion spells) into the Illusionist spell list only.
I was considering playtesting this addition, when it was brought up that you are canceling another characters action, with a attack of opportunity. this is a pretty amazing thing and although idealy they can cancel your action when you cast your spell, it's still killing there action without much price.
please explain how this is not increadibly powerful