I am playing an abjuration specialist wizard and am pretty disappointed by the lack of new abjuration spells in the book. I don't think I am looking for anything much. I just felt like sharing.
How can they not have that many new abjuration spells? So what do they?
Christopher, what sort of abjuration spells would you like to see?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not Christopher, but I'd like to see more accessible (see: lower level) versions of spells like Spell Turning.
Abjuration is one of the least supported schools of magic, and making it a little more viable would go a long way. Maybe make it the home of a few more immediate action defensive spells?
Counter-spelling in general isn't used very often, and since Abjuration is the home of the other counter-speling type spells, an array of spells that maybe have focused but applicable counter-spelling options as immediate actions could be cool. I think in the decade plus of playing Pathfinder and D&D, I've seen someone successfully counterspell, once. I think I've only even seen it attempted a handful of times, largely because it's a clunky system that results in wasted turns more often than not. Spells that made it more viable would be awesome.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Christopher, what sort of abjuration spells would you like to see?
Protection from Elvis
|
Some Thassilonian-flavored abjurations.
It might be neat to harken back to the days of old, and design some spells that ward against specific creature types, similar to the old 'scrolls of protection vs. X.'
A ward against undead for instance, might create an aura in a 10 ft radius around the caster, in which all undead receive penalties equivalent to the shaken condition (even if undead would normally be immune to that condition), and requires an undead creature to make a Will save to directly attack you, like an undead-specific sanctuary spell. Alternately, instead of debuffing the undead, it might give everyone not of that type within 10 ft. of you a +2 to AC and saves versus attacks and effects from that creature type.
There'd be ward against dragons and ward against shapechangers and ward against aberrations, etc.
Different sorts of mechanics could exist as well, perhaps tailored on the creature type being warded against (the ward against dragons might give a bonus to resist breath weapons and fearful presence, while ward against undead might give 'DR 1' versus ability damage from undead attacks and negate the first level of energy drain taken by each protected person during the spells duration).
Spells that affect a specific sort of energy, creating an aura or field or emanation that halves the damage of any (for instance) fire damage in the area, and prevents anyone or thing from 'catching on fire' as long as the fire-suppressing field exists. Like resist energy or protection from energy, it would be a single spell, that at the time of casting, the abjurer could tune to affect acid, cold, electricity or fire damage, and perhaps even more unusual sources, like sonic, force, negative energy or positive energy (possibly halving all healing in the area, in the latter case!).
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not Christopher, but I'd like to see more accessible (see: lower level) versions of spells like Spell Turning.
Okay, so something like spell turning, but maybe it only turns back 1d2 spell levels worth of spells?
Abjuration is one of the least supported schools of magic, and making it a little more viable would go a long way. Maybe make it the home of a few more immediate action defensive spells?
Interesting.
Counter-spelling in general isn't used very often, and since Abjuration is the home of the other counter-speling type spells, an array of spells that maybe have focused but applicable counter-spelling options as immediate actions could be cool. I think in the decade plus of playing Pathfinder and D&D, I've seen someone successfully counterspell, once. I think I've only even seen it attempted a handful of times, largely because it's a clunky system that results in wasted turns more often than not. Spells that made it more viable would be awesome.
I think the problem is counterspelling, not that there aren't enough options for spells to use when counterspelling. I'd rather fix the problem (how counterspelling works) than attempt to patch the seeping wound (add more spells that make counterspelling less annoying).
|
Though Ultimate Magic might not have had many helpful Abjurations, the Communal versions from Ultimate Combat are very handy if your team-mates are willing to wait before charging into superior opponents. It might not matter that you're all in Fireball formation if your first spell is Communal Protection From Fire.
Also, I didn't mind the smaller spell list because most of them were already very handy. Though counterspelling isn't used often, it's mainly because it's very situational and risky, most people would rather let both casters do something than use up a spell slot to stop their opponent from using theirs, and in general, a readied attack tends to be more reliable, while using up only one shot of ammo instead of a spell slot.
I've got an Abjurer with whom I'd like to counterspell enemy spellcasters, but since he's so far only faced two opposing wizards (both of whom specialized in one of his opposition schools), it doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon.
In closing, it sounds counter-intuitive, but Ultimate Combat looked to me to have more support for Abjurers than Ultimate Magic did.
|
|
I'm not Christopher, but I'd like to see more accessible (see: lower level) versions of spells like Spell Turning.Okay, so something like spell turning, but maybe it only turns back 1d2 spell levels worth of spells?
That'd be great, yeah.
I see where you're coming from on updating the counter-spelling system, I just thought that asking for a few spells had a larger chance of seeing some success than requesting that an entire system be revamped, clunky though it might be.
I've had good luck replacing the counter spelling system with spell duel's countering system. From UM.
|
|
Though counterspelling isn't used often, it's mainly because it's very situational and risky, most people would rather let both casters do something than use up a spell slot to stop their opponent from using theirs, and in general, a readied attack tends to be more reliable, while using up only one shot of ammo instead of a spell slot.
I've got an Abjurer with whom I'd like to counterspell enemy spellcasters, but since he's so far only faced two opposing wizards (both of whom specialized in one of his opposition schools), it doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon.
Exactly my point. Counter-spelling is already generally weighted against the player, since it's rare to find yourself facing a caster who is the same or lower level than you. You also to have the right spell (or Dispel) prepare, use a Ready action to be prepared, and then... Pray he actually casts a spell instead of using a class ability or activating a trap or what have you. Oh, and that you're able to identify the spell so you can actually counter. It's under-used because it's clunky, inefficient, eats up game time, and is as likely to fail or waste a turn by never being executed as it is to do any good.
It's why I had suggested maybe increasing the Abjurer's options for counter-spelling, though SKR's preference to overhaul the whole system would probably be the best course.
That'd be great, yeah.I'm not Christopher, but I'd like to see more accessible (see: lower level) versions of spells like Spell Turning.Okay, so something like spell turning, but maybe it only turns back 1d2 spell levels worth of spells?
Okay, so two things about that.
1) Even a 1-spell-level hypothetical lesser spell turning would be better than counterspelling. Counterspelling has a chance of failure and requires you to ready an action; lesser spell turning would automatically turn a level 1 incoming spell targeted at you and doesn't require you to ready at action.
2) Lesser spell turning as a 1st-level spell would probably be better than protection from evil, which is another 1st-level spell. Protection from evil lasts against multiple spells over its duration, but only gives a +2 save bonus and only against evil spells. Lesser spell turning would completely negate 1 targeted spell (which is better than a save bonus) and works on non-evil spells. If lesser spell resistance is a 1st-level spell, it would be slightly stronger than protection from evil. True, protection from evil works on non-targeted spells, so perhaps that's a balancing factor. But also remember that lesser spell turning isn't just negating the incoming spell, it's turning it back on its caster, which is a more powerful result than any other 1st-level abjuration. And honestly, I think the idea of "I expend a 1st-level spell to negate your 1st-level spell cast at me" is more like my ideal concept of how counterspelling should work rather than a specific spell you'd have to prepare.
3) Lesser spell turning as a 2nd-level spell (but only turning 1 spell level) might situationally be more useful that resist energy, but overall I think it would be a weaker spell than other 2nd-level abjurations. So we're between a rock and a hard place with a spell that's too good for 1st level and not good enough for 2nd level. And making it turn back 2 levels of spells starts to get into the "maybe this is too powerful compared to other 2nd-level spells" category.
It's not an easy thing to fix. And spell turning is really good--it's a 7th-level spell that can potentially redirect up to 10 levels of spells (so it's a 7th-level spell that can turn a 9th-level spell back on your attacker). It's so good that it's reserved for high-level play... frustratingly out of reach for most campaigns.
Food for thought.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've got you Sean, I was just hoping your brain honed by years of game design might be able to punch through the block there :) **EDIT** (This was meant to sound complimentary, but after posting I realized it could be read to seem sarcastic)
You indicated that a lot of this comes back to "We can't do this because it's better than the existing mechanic of counterspelling", and I just wanted to reiterate that counterspelling is probably the worst system in all of Pathfinder (my personal opinion). It's like there's this system that completely disincentives you to use it at multiple levels. What about an immmediate action reflective spell that progresses just like Summon Monster or those other level by level spells, but which has a variable mechanic like the Protection from Alignment spells? So you could spend a level one spell slot to to memorize "Spell Riposte I (Evocation)" and you can use that slot to counter/reflect a same level Evocation spell? So you'd have Spell Riposte I - IX
and then it's divided up so you have to select the particular school you're planning to counter at the time you memorize/choose the spell?
I realize this still steps on the traditional counter-spelling a bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spell ideas: Interfering with the magical capabilities of your foes, without being specific to them casting a specific spell.
Things like 'lowering DCs of magical abilities they use' or 'force a concentration check for X rounds, as if they were taking continuous damage'. Maybe something like Ablative Barrier, but for bonuses to saving throws.
Maybe some spell that has X charges, and automatically uses up those charges to give a bonus to AC or saving throws as needed. If you are targetted by a non-harmless spell, you get a bonus to the saving throw and a charge is deducted. Attacked? You get a bonus to AC, and a charge is deducted. Not sure how to deal with the idea of one spell vs many attacks in a round, but this is all very high level.
|
|
Spell ideas: Interfering with the magical capabilities of your foes, without being specific to them casting a specific spell.
Things like 'lowering DCs of magical abilities they use' or 'force a concentration check for X rounds, as if they were taking continuous damage'. Maybe something like Ablative Barrier, but for bonuses to saving throws.
Maybe some spell that has X charges, and automatically uses up those charges to give a bonus to AC or saving throws as needed. If you are targetted by a non-harmless spell, you get a bonus to the saving throw and a charge is deducted. Attacked? You get a bonus to AC, and a charge is deducted. Not sure how to deal with the idea of one spell vs many attacks in a round, but this is all very high level.
Wasn't there a spell back in the ol' 3.0/3.5 Forgotten Realms that created a certain number of circling spheres depending on your level that could each negate a particular type of damage or attack before being expended? That would be cool.
BTW, if that already exists somewhere in PF and I just missed it, please let me know.
Oh, I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying it's not easy.
And no, I'm not selling protection from X short, I just don't have an extra hour in my day to write out an even-more-detailed analysis. :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying it's not easy.
And no, I'm not selling protection from X short, I just don't have an extra hour in my day to write out an even-more-detailed analysis. :)
Just out of curiosity, when you favorited my post, was it because of my compliment to you, my criticism of the counter-spelling system, or my recommendation for a Spell Riposte spell?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I fave'd your post so you'd know I understood you weren't being sarcastic. Your other ideas are worth merit.
I'm much more in the "if you want to use all of your spell slots negating your opponent's casting, that's your choice, we could have it be an immediate action to counterspell" camp, though. :)
(BTW, I wrote about half of the spells in Magic of Faerûn, so I know what Kimera is talkin' about.)
|
|
I fave'd your post so you'd know I understood you weren't being sarcastic. Your other ideas are worth merit.
I'm much more in the "if you want to use all of your spell slots negating your opponent's casting, that's your choice, we could have it be an immediate action to counterspell" camp, though. :)
(BTW, I wrote about half of the spells in Magic of Faerûn, so I know what Kimera is talkin' about.)
Gosh Magic of Faerun was a great supplement. I think I've still got that somewhere. Wasn't that the book that Simbul's Synostodweomer was in?
What are the odds of us getting counterspelling changed to an immediate action Sean? Or at least getting a feat or something to change it to that?
(Either way, I really like the idea of the Spell Riposte I-IX spells as new abjuration spells. Having a "spell reversal" spell tied tightly in to each level of spell casting seems like it'd be fun and give the Abjurer something that resembles an offensive spell without breaking away from the general form and function of the abjuration school.)
I always thought the issue of counter spelling was that players dont like spending their action to do it? I guess stopping a fireball is less exciting than casting one?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I always thought the issue of counter spelling was that players dont like spending their action to do it? I guess stopping a fireball is less exciting than casting one?
You have to select a specific opponent to counterspell. You then have to ready an action to counterspell. You then have to identify the spell being cast and either have the same spell (or same school of spell if you've grabbed the right feat) or Dispel Magic available. If the person you've chosen to counterspell decides not to cast, or casts a spell you don't recognize, or if you fail your Spellcraft check, or if the spell he casts isn't one you have an appropriate spell available to counter, you've just wasted an entire turn. It's a system weighted against the counterspeller at every turn, and is probably the absolute worst way to spend a turn since you have spectacularly low odds of success.
Gunslingers make good counterspellers. Wizard may outsmart dispel magic, but can't out smart bullet.
|
I countered a spell once as my Abjuress.
My character was coming up to a tower in the distance when my character spotted movement on the top of the tower, barely seeing a humanoid shape there. My GM was only just barely about to say something about it moving, when I yelled and cut him off - "I begin counterspelling fireball!".
"..."
"Uh, well to your satisfaction a small poof of the disrupted magical energies appear at the top of the distant tower..."
Ahh... Good times....
You had to be there.
Anyway I must fully throw my support behind Abjuration getting more support! I get that of the five MT:G colors, blue is often the most powerful but it's really my color and being allowed to achieve that sensation would be awesome.
Unless the gunslinger shoots them while casting those spells. :) But let's leave schroedinger's wizard / gunslinger out of this.
What other spell ideas could there be? Could there be archetype support?
The problem with the immediate action counterspells, IMO, is that the wizard Abjuration subschool already placed it in the game...so anything will be compared against that. And that tops out at 4 immediate counterspells per day. That's sort of low as something to base a character around.
I like the idea of making counterspelling easier. What I've written here is more food for thought, not necessarily well thought out but some initial musings.
Counterspelling is an immediate action. If a successful spellcraft check is made then the spell can be countered by any spell that is a level higher, an equal spell from the same school, or from one level lower by an opposing school. If a spell is countered by a spell from the same school that is two or more levels higher then the energy is blown back and the effects of either spell (counterspellers choice) will impact the caster.
Opposing schools
Abjuration <-> Evocation
Conjuration <-> Necromancy
Divination <-> Enchantment
Illusion <-> Transmutation
Universal spells have no opposition but may be countered by any spell.
Counterspell Mastery is replaced with immunity to spell blow back.
Just some ideas to throw into the pot.
I’m also not a Chris, but will chime in nonetheless.
I would like to see some additional spells similar to or building on some of the very good or flavorful abjuration spells in the PF Campaign: specifically shield & it’s shock shield variant, dweomer retaliation, and spell absorption:
A spell which allows you to “hold” a counter-spell for a certain amount of time (1 min static?) and release it as an immediate action. If not used, you lose the “holding” spell, but not the spell you would have released to counter the incoming magic.
Retributive abjuration spells, which allow you to choose a school or specific spell when memorizing or casting (similar to how Spell Immunity works), if you counter one of the spells in the list it either aids your, hinders the opposing caster, or damages the opposing caster.
In a similar vein, something similar so that those who counter spell abjuration specialists may take damage or find themselves otherwise hindered.
More variants on shield – maybe one that gives a resistance bonus or one that you choose a specific spell or effect when it is cast and gain a +4 untyped (or at least not resistance or deflection) bonus against it, so that it would add to other effects that the Abjurer likely has going from their CLA’s or other items or spells.
A similar random thought – more spells or abilities which encourage or reward taking Spell Focus (Abjuration) would be great, rather than it seeming like being focused in your main school of magic is great flavor, but incredibly useless.
-TimD
|
|
More variants on shield – maybe one that gives a resistance bonus or one that you choose a specific spell or effect when it is cast and gain a +4 untyped (or at least not resistance or deflection) bonus against it, so that it would add to other effects that the Abjurer likely has going from their CLA’s or other items or spells.
As long as the game as a bajillion different bonus types, it would make sense that the Abjurer would have spells to grant them. Not just resistance and deflection bonuses, but also insight bonuses and luck bonuses and morale and enhancement and dodge and competence and circumstance bonuses.
I'm not 100% in love with that many types of bonus even existing in the game, but, as long as they do, and as long as there is an Abjuration specialist, that seems the absolute first place that you should see a bunch of different AC and saving throw bonuses stacking up, under the spellwork of a *specialist* in protective and warding spells.
Defense is almost always a worse choice than offense (one of seven reasons that counterspelling kind of sucks), so it would hardly break the game if the Abjurer was a hard nut to crack. Like the crane style monk, it would just mean that he would die last. :)
A similar random thought – more spells or abilities which encourage or reward taking Spell Focus (Abjuration) would be great, rather than it seeming like being focused in your main school of magic is great flavor, but incredibly useless.
Abjurations that reduce or restrict a foes power, or make it hard for them to target the caster (or someone he's protecting), or cause some sort of retributive effect on them for attacking a protected target (similar to fire shield) in some way seem the logical place to introduce abjurations that would benefit from Spell Focus.
Divination has the same problem, and could definitely benefit from a few 'offensive divinations,' like spells that open a foes mind to a bunch of unwanted and useless knowledge, or cause his sensory perceptions to overlap with dozens of conflicting viewpoints and perspectives, or to suddenly remember his entire life, all at once, or see a dozen premonitions of his death, or flashback to the many times he was injured in the past and relive the pain of those injuries, etc.
It doesn't have to be all 'Jean Grey shows Mastermind the entire universe, all at once, and breaks his tiny brain' or 'I have something for you. Thirty hours of pain, all at once, all for you,' but there's no shortage of interesting ways to mess with someone using divination or abjuration...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What are the odds of us getting counterspelling changed to an immediate action Sean?
This many years after the release of the Core Rulebook? Probably zero. That's a significant change to the way the rules work, and would have a cascading effect on many things built to interact with the (arguably weak) counterspelling rules as they are.
Or at least getting a feat or something to change it to that?
Much more possible.
I GMed for an abjurer when this book came out.
You should look at the feats, not the spells.
Abjuration already has some of the best spells in the game, but Ultimate Magic gives you the tools to effectively spam them in interesting ways.
|
|
This many years after the release of the Core Rulebook? Probably zero. That's a significant change to the way the rules work, and would have a cascading effect on many things built to interact with the (arguably weak) counterspelling rules as they are.
Or at least getting a feat or something to change it to that?Much more possible.
That would be awesome. Some new Counterspelling feats that make it a valid technique would be awesome. I wouldn't even be against marrying the feats to the Abjurer via a Spell Focus (Abjuration) prereq or something similar. It would make sense that the best counterspelling would be linked to the Abjuration school. If you could build an entire feat chain with improved effects like redirecting countered spells or giving it some offensive use, that would be even better, but I can understand the concerns about balance with systems like that.
I've introduced some homebrew abjuration spells for countering with immediate action casting time and verbal component - Counterspell I-IX(I might add a cantrip), they are so far only for wiz/sorc.
Each level's version counters lower level spells automatically, and same level spells with a succesful dispel check.
This is for a two player gestalt game, and I wanted them to have the option to counterspell, without spending their vastly limited actions on this. So far they haven't chosen them :(
But I would really like to see something like this. I was inspired partly by Magic: the Gathering and partly by "How do I get 'Harry Potter'-style spell duels?"
In all honesty, I'm not certain of the power-level of this, but I figured it wouldn't matter too much in two player gestalt. I'm thinking about changing it to "same level or lower automatically, higher with increasingly difficult dispel check."
Abjuration spells/feats/options that would be nice to see (all are from 3E):
Something like the Archmage's Mastery of Counterspelling.
Mastery of Counterspelling
When the archmage counterspells a spell, it is turned back upon the caster as if it were fully affected by a spell turning spell. If the spell cannot be affected by spell turning, then it is merely counterspelled. This ability costs one 7th-level spell slot.
Lesser version of prismatic wall/sphere spells that work like the area or wall wardings of the Initiate of the Seven-fold Veil PrC. Area or warding, not personal...there's enough selfish caster stuff already.
Reciprocal Gyre or similar spell. It deals damage based upon how many spell levels worth of spells are currently affecting the target. Tremendously punishes someone for being massively buffed up. PF desperately needs something like this.
Complete Mage had a 4th level Otiluke's spell that nullified a specified school or subschool or magic from functioning within its area. It was like the fine scalpel version of Antimagic Field's one size fits all wooden mallet. That was pretty interesting.
EDIT: And how about a lower level, less insane version of Mage's Disjunction. Something that lets you dispel everything (while as greater dispel is much more limited in how many effects it can dispel) within an area, not necessarily automatically but with a significant bonus on the CL check. And no long-term magic item/artifact destruction or removal of magical properties. Something in the spell level 7-8 range.
In the past, feats that are meant to be added as an option for class abilities have language reflecting this. See crossbow mastery for how this works!
My player's final feat load out: scribe scroll, magical aptitude, persuasive, improved initiative, improved counterspell, spell focus (abjuration), silent spell, spell specialization (greater dispel magic), preferred spell (dispel magic), preferred spell (greater dispel magic), extend spell, destructive dispel, spell perfection (greater dispel magic), echoing spell.
That's not even optimal.
It was downright annoying (in a fun way). He undermined every spellcasting BBEG and the martials just beat the snot out of them.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I actually think counterspelling is situationally way too good. Specifically I am thinking about the situation where you are fighting a "BBEG" spellcaster. Then your wizard has a pretty good chance to completely neutralize him while the other 3 guys beat on him. I remember doing that in D&D 3E, anyway. In particular, I think I had greater teleport so I could (with 100% certainty) block him from getting away. ... maybe the rules changed in pathfinder or something (?), but, i thought it was pretty brutal then.
Maybe that's what you mean, that it is way too good in some situations and way too bad in others?
(Though, I guess I didn't like the situation in which "readying action to sorching ray him when he casts" is a better counterspell than counterspelling.)
Anyway, it could probably use some work. But I don't agree that it is an option that nobody would ever use as-is.
I think "counterspell as an immediate action" would be extremely cheesy. I appreciate that there is some level of tactics or thought required ... i would probably do away with immediate actions altogether (except for special cases like "featherfall").
See my earlier post-
You have to select a specific opponent to counterspell. You then have to ready an action to counterspell. You then have to identify the spell being cast and either have the same spell (or same school of spell if you've grabbed the right feat) or Dispel Magic available. If the person you've chosen to counterspell decides not to cast, or casts a spell you don't recognize, or if you fail your Spellcraft check, or if the spell he casts isn't one you have an appropriate spell available to counter, you've just wasted an entire turn. It's a system weighted against the counterspeller at every turn, and is probably the absolute worst way to spend a turn since you have spectacularly low odds of success.There are numerous variables that all have to align in order for you to successfully counterspell, and you can't do anything else. If the BBEG Necromancer sees you readying the counterspell, or gets smart after your first counterspell, he can just start using Grave Touch to send your allies scurrying away while turning his minions on you, and you'll have wasted an entire turn prepping a counterspell for a spell that was never cast. It gets even less useful when fighting spellcasting enemies like Witches or Clerics who can just shrug and start throwing Hexes or swinging maces.
And God forbid you should be fighting two enemy spellcasters and pick the wrong one. If BBEG A decides to buff BBEG B and you thought BBEG B was going to drop an AOE, you can't redirect your counterspell to the guy who is actually casting because counterspelling requires you to pick a specific target.
Counterspelling in its current iteration is tactically the worst option you can choose in almost any situation, unless your party happens to be fighting a single spellcaster with no minions, no melee or SU options, and who has never been in a situation where someone has counterspelled him before so he didn't take Spell Bluff or something similar.
just would like to add that SU, SLA and other ability are something almost every class has now so they are almost always a option. a quick look the only class with out a SU ability that can cast is the ranger.... which has plenty of combat options
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not Christopher, but I'd like to see more accessible (see: lower level) versions of spells like Spell Turning.Okay, so something like spell turning, but maybe it only turns back 1d2 spell levels worth of spells?
Abjuration is one of the least supported schools of magic, and making it a little more viable would go a long way. Maybe make it the home of a few more immediate action defensive spells?Interesting.
Counter-spelling in general isn't used very often, and since Abjuration is the home of the other counter-speling type spells, an array of spells that maybe have focused but applicable counter-spelling options as immediate actions could be cool. I think in the decade plus of playing Pathfinder and D&D, I've seen someone successfully counterspell, once. I think I've only even seen it attempted a handful of times, largely because it's a clunky system that results in wasted turns more often than not. Spells that made it more viable would be awesome.I think the problem is counterspelling, not that there aren't enough options for spells to use when counterspelling. I'd rather fix the problem (how counterspelling works) than attempt to patch the seeping wound (add more spells that make counterspelling less annoying).
If you improve counterspelling, I will be very happy. The wizard vs. wizard counterspelling fight is a missing element in D&D. It seems like it should be a natural skill casters learn.