[Counterspelling] Replace Awkward Mechanics with Effective Disruption

[quest-master]

I would like to suggest the following change to counterspelling mechanics.

1. Counterspelling is an immediate action (once per round for those unfamiliar with immediate action rules).
2. Instead of readying a spell to counterspell, you expend a spell or spell slot to make a ranged touch attack against the desired target. The target must be within 30 feet.
3. On a successful hit, the target must make a caster level check or lose the spell.
4. The DC for the check is equal to 10 + 1d4 per spell level of the expended spell/spell slot + key spellcasting ability modifier of the counterspeller.
5. The counterspeller's place in the initiative order must be higher than the target's. (???)

Premise?
This simulates magical energy flung by the counterspeller to disrupt the flow of magical energy being focused by the target.

Balance?
This requires both a ranged touch attack as well as a check failure by the target to work.
It is immediate but the counterspeller still sacrifices his/her spell/spell slot to do this.

Design Options?
Feats can improve the DC and range of the counterspell attack. Feats may add additional effects such as entangling the target on a successful counterspell. Spells may be cast to augment counterspelling attempts as well.

This probably won't be everyone's cup of tea but it will probably see a decent amount of use as opposed to the current mechanic which is used rarely.

[Mosaic]

I agree that counterspelling is totally awkward and needs to be reworked. As others have said, I've NEVER seen it used in any game I've ever played. I was trying out a few alternatives, here they are for comment:

A) Ready an action and if your opponent begins to cast a spell, make a Spellcraft check (just as in 3.5). If you succeed and identify the spell she is casting, you may counter it with ANY spell of the same level and appropriate type (arcane/divine).
* The idea here is you are interfering with the magical energies before they have fully become a fireball or lightning bolt or whatever, and that all 3rd-level spells contain the same amount of magical potential. This doesn't get around having to ready an action (and potentially waste it), but at least you'll be more likely to pull off the counterspell.

B) Ready an action and if you opponent begins to cast a spell, you may make a counterspell attack. To make a counterspell attack, expend any spell you have using the formula: d20 + 1/2 the spell level + your total Spellcraft bouns vs. the DC of the spell you are attempting to counter (10 + the spell level + the caster's Int bonus). If your match or beat the DC, your opponent's spell is ruined; if your total is lower than the DC, you still spend the spell but do not interrupt her spell.
* Here I wanted to make the counterspell more like a regular attack, rolling a d20 vs. DC of the spell. I went with DC (10 + spell level + Int bonus) rather than the old '15 + spell level' because most people already have the DCs of their spells written somewhere; no new calculations, no matter how simple = good. My formula is a little cumbersome at first, though. I wanted to include both Spellcraft ranks and Int bonus, so total Spellcraft bonus made sense, but the level of the spell expended had to matter too; I went with 1/2 to represent that the spell you are giving up isn't the exact same spell as the one being cast. Maybe if you do counter with the same spell, you could drop the 1/2 and get full spell levels. It might be better, then, to phrase it more like a skill check: "Make a Spellcraft check vs. the DC of the spell being countered. Add 1/2 the level of the spell you gave up to your Spellcraft check, or, if the spell you gave up is the same as the spell being countered, add the full level of the spell you gave up to your Spellcraft check."

Neither of my ideas deal with the whole readied action problem. Honestly, if I were going to try to mess up somebodies spell, I'd have to wait for her to start casting. Readying an action - and potentially wasting that action - seem fair as long as you've got a pretty good chance of killing her spell, which both of my ideas achieve by allowing you to use any spell, not just the exact spell being cast.

PS - I also agree with the OP that some feats that improve counterspelling would be awesome, things that just add bonuses to your Spellcraft checks or that have additional effects if you succeed (entangling, stealing her spell, stunning her, doing actual damage, etc.)

[The Wraith]

The Counterspell option is, in my personal experience, one of the least used options from 3.x (in 8 years of play, I've seen perhaps once or twice in use AT ALL), yet it's a powerful ability that can weaken a spell-slinging foe. However, due to the mechanics involved, it's almost never used.
A caster in fact is usually more eager to cast one of his spells BEFORE the enemy, rather than wasting an action waiting for interrupting a spell that he HOPES he has memorized/he knows; more often than not, the Dispel Magic (or Greater Dispel Magic) is used, instead... and again, at the price of an offensive/defending/disabling spell.

I've been playtesting an 'house-rule' where Counterspell becomes an Immediate action; in this way, I thought, a caster could cast his spells during his action, with the possibility to ruin the enemy's spells without wasting a round (at worst, a caster should have not to 'burn' his swift action in order to Counterspell during the enemy's turn); however, the presence of the Dispel Magic spell suddenly became a nuisance more than ever (and woe to the foes of a Sorcerer or bard with such a spell among his known ones !). Then, some other problems started to 'pop-up': if you try to Counterspell with a scroll or a wand, do you have to ready an action, or you can use them as an Immediate action, too? And is it possible to 'Counter-Counterspell' with this method, where you cast your spell as a standard action and, if receiving an 'Immediate' Counterspell, you use your Swift action for the round to 'Counter' the counterspell itself ?

So, it's an opened can of worms, as you can see... But I'm still convinced that the 'vanilla' Counterspell needs some boost in order to become a more viable action in battle (and a way to keep the casters under control, too; a sword swing can connect or not, but a spell CAN be really messed with - Saving Throws, Spell Resistance, and Counterspell).

I have some ideas in order to accomplish this:

1) Counterspell is an Immediate action, but with SPELLCASTING only (if you use a spell-activation or spell-completion item, you must still 'ready an action'). Counter-counterspell is not possible. Dispel Magic and Greater Dispel cannot be used to Counterspell at all.

2) Counterspell is an Immediate action, but with SPELLCASTING only (if you use a spell-activation or spell-completion item, you must still 'ready an action'). Counter-counterspell is not possible. Dispel Magic and Greater Dispel CAN be used (with the usual check in order to be successful).

3) As Owen Anderson suggested here, get rid of the Counterspell action and create a list of spells named 'Counterspell I', 'Counterspell II', and so on, that are cast as Immediate actions.

Owen Anderson wrote:

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.

As a personal suggestion I would add, these same spells CANNOT be Counterspelled themselves (no 'Counter-Counterspell' again).

I'm currently playing with the Option n°2, but I admit that n°3 is EXTREMELY appealing...

As a side note, Counterspell SHOULD influence (with any of the above options) even Spell-like abilities and Psionics, IMHO... At the present, nothing (except from interrupting because of damage or vigorous movement) can hinder Spell-like abilities (but also, mosters with only spell-like abilities cannot hinder spellcasters, too), and Psionics is vulnerable to magic (and can defend AGAINST magic) only through the Dispel Magic/Dispel Psionics Counterspell option...

[quest-master]

I experimented with Counterspell as an immediate abjuration spell years ago. The caster and the target had to make opposed caster level checks, gaining a bonus or penalty depending on who was using a higher level spell.

My specialist abjurer didn't get much use of it though, since fighting against spell-casting enemies was rarer than I would have liked or the spell-casting enemy was killed before I got a chance to use the spell. I ended up having a dead space more or less in my spell selection for a lot of adventures. That is why Counterspelling should not be an actual spell unless it is something like a counter spellng zone that persists for 1 round/level where the first caster to cast a spell must make an opposed caster level check against the caster.

A rule should also be added that no immediate or swift action spell can be counterspelled by a counterspell attack since such a spell is cast too quickly to be effectively countered.

The rules for counterspell were made before the introduction of swift and immediate actions so they don't account for swift and immediate actions.

[wastevens80]

I agree that counter spell needs to be re-thought to be useful. I like many of the ideas posted here. In my campaigns I've had a counter spell since old second edition as a house rule. It works like this:
Anytime a magic user notices a spell being cast, they can immediately dump a spell to attempt a counter spell. The casting mage makes a caster level check with a +1 per level of spell being cast, the DC is the countering mage's caster level check, +1/per level of spell dumped for the counter spell. The counter spell works much like an attack of opportunity, only it is a special attack of opportunity used by casters triggered by another caster casting a spell within range of the counter spell. I like the idea of then using feats to increase countering parameters.

[Set]

quest-master wrote:

I experimented with Counterspell as an immediate abjuration spell years ago. The caster and the target had to make opposed caster level checks, gaining a bonus or penalty depending on who was using a higher level spell.

My specialist abjurer didn't get much use of it though, since fighting against spell-casting enemies was rarer than I would have liked or the spell-casting enemy was killed before I got a chance to use the spell. I ended up having a dead space more or less in my spell selection for a lot of adventures.

Try using the same rule, but allow a specialist Abjurer (and only a specialist Abjurer) to spontaneously convert prepared Abjuration spells into Counterspells. That way, he doesn't need to fill up his slots with Counterspells (the way any other Wizard would have to), but does have to at least prepare some Abjuration spells if he wants to Spontaneously counterspell.

The Abjurer is still going to be limited in effectiveness vs. most encounters (where the monsters are using spell-like abilities, or supernatural abilities or merely exceptional abilities), but against a rival spellcaster, he's got a chance to shine.

Since most 'big end boss' spellcasters are a few levels higher than the party, the Abjurer won't be as able to shut them down, since they'll be casting spells of a higher level than the Abjurer has available to use as Counterspells. This helps make sure that the party Abjurer doesn't 'shut down' the lich or evil high priest or whatever at the end of the adventure.