I really don't understand the point of the counterspell rules. It seems to me that if I were say a wizard battling another wizard and I got the leg up on him on initiative I would not then decide to take the risk that I could possibly counterspell his attack, but rather I would simply take the advantage and attack him.
I understand that there are specializations and classes that have easier times counterspelling, but generally it seems weak and underused even among those classes.
You never get a sense of warring wizards as the battles that often happen between them take almost not time at all, usually ending with the slightest mistake or fortune. While I appreciate the suddenness of spellcaster combat I often find that it feels like a simple show of raw power rather than any real thought or finesse. Simply pulling out your biggest spells, be they enchantment, conjuration, transmutation or the ever popular evocation to disable/destroy the competition.
I have often considered alternatives to this to change the dynamic, the one I have often stuck with is turning all counterspell actions to free and bumping up the difficulty of detection.
While I find this to be adequate for most of my games I still would like to ask the question: In what instance were these rules to be used (by a non-specialized user possibly with imp counterspell) effectively to change the outcome of a battle?
Smart "counterspelling" lets you reduce the effectiveness of more powerful enemy combatants. Say you're a 9th level wizard, and bump into a 20th level enemy. Say you win initiative, and have already exhausted your spells that let you nope your way out of there. You could Magic Missile him as he's casting his next spell to push the concentration DC higher than he could cast (5d4+5, or about +17).
Actual counterspelling is pretty bad, though. It's a really good way to waste actions shutting down a weaker mage. For a mage of the same level, it's a toss-up, for a higher-level mage, you won't win. If you suspect your opponent is about to pull a spell combo on you, normally the best thing to do is shut them down completely. If you can't do that, then you could try counterspelling and hope it breaks the combo. Still, regular counterspelling is for chumps and Arcanists.
And this is what I mean, the ruleset seems to serve no other purpose than to set the framework for the counterspell specializations and even those seem to fall short.
Yeah, the counterspell rules as written are pretty bad and are rarely worth using. Readying a spell and hitting your opponent with it when he tries to cast is far more effective and reliable. I houserule that everyone gets the Improved Counterspell feat for free, and it still almost never gets used.
My Self wrote: Smart "counterspelling" lets you reduce the effectiveness of more powerful enemy combatants. Say you're a 9th level wizard, and bump into a 20th level enemy. Say you win initiative, and have already exhausted your spells that let you nope your way out of there. You could Magic Missile him as he's casting his next spell to push the concentration DC higher than he could cast (5d4+5, or about +17).
Actual counterspelling is pretty bad, though. It's a really good way to waste actions shutting down a weaker mage. For a mage of the same level, it's a toss-up, for a higher-level mage, you won't win. Regular counterspelling is for chumps and Arcanists.
Also I would note that since you have to hit someone as their casting a spell on their turn your smart counterspelling doesn't work. You could do it with a quicken missile and that is actually a great idea. Especially when you read this tidbit of rules:
if you are affected by a spell while attempting to cast a spell of your own, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell you are casting. If the spell affecting you deals damage, the DC is 10 + the damage taken + the level of the spell you're casting.
If the spell interferes with you or distracts you in some other way, the DC is the spell's saving throw DC + the level of the spell you're casting. For a spell with no saving throw, it's the DC that the spell's saving throw would have if a save were allowed (10 + spell level + caster's ability score).
Dasrak wrote: Yeah, the counterspell rules as written are pretty bad and are rarely worth using. Readying a spell and hitting your opponent with it when he tries to cast is far more effective and reliable. I houserule that everyone gets the Improved Counterspell feat for free, and it still almost never gets used. Oh I see a ready action approach. Nevermind my last comment.
Dispel Magic works on anything your opponent casts. Actual spell counterspells work perfectly on your opponent's same spell, but the question arises: Why didn't you cast the spell yourself?
However, it is slightly better as part of a group. If you're up against a mage, your teammates will be very happy you're negating the mage while they focus on chopping him up. Assuming you couldn't just nuke the mage on the first round.
My Self wrote: Dispel Magic works on anything your opponent casts. Actual spell counterspells work perfectly on your opponent's same spell, but the question arises: Why didn't you cast the spell yourself?
However, it is slightly better as part of a group. If you're up against a mage, your teammates will be very happy you're negating the mage while they focus on chopping him up. Assuming you couldn't just nuke the mage on the first round.
I would prefer a spellbreaker fighter anyday. Those actually seem to be effective at their job.
Perhaps I should move the thread to advice and title it "how to fix counterspell".
Ok I did that. I wont be looking that this thread much anymore, because the verdict seems to be clear.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
A counterspell/dispel build can be crazy awesome if you know what you're doing. Basic no-frills counterspelling, on the other hand, is crap, and is almost always beat out by simply readying an action to blast your foe as he's casting his own spells.
An example of a good counterspeller/dispeller is my master abjurer, Sela Kurn, who has never lost a spell battle. He can automatically dispel anything that has a caster level of 26 or less. What's more, when he dispels an enemy's spells (which is always), he also stuns them and debuffs their saves by quite a bit. Usually makes the follow up spell the "two" in a "one-two punch knockout."
Here's a more in-depth explanation of how the character works. Though the info is a little dated now, the core idea is still there.
I've also used him to great effect as an NPC against my players.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
