So as you all know dispel magic is a handy dandy catch all counterspell. I am 99% sure the answer is yes, but figured I would ask this question just in case.
So when using it as a counterspell, it says this:
Counterspell: When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell targets a spellcaster and is cast as a counterspell. Unlike a true counterspell, however, dispel magic may not work; you must make a dispel check to counter the other spellcaster's spell.Straightforward enough. Now the issue comes when a long range spell comes into play (we'll say fireball since it is pretty much the most used offensive 3rd level spell ever). So imagine wizard A is casting fireball from 500 ft away and for sake of argument we assume that wizard B knows that is what wizard A is about to cast. Wizard B doesnt want to die, but doesnt have a fireball handy to counter it with, so he wants to try to use Dispel Magic. Dispel magic has a medium range, which is far short of the 500 ft wizard A can throw his fireball from. Since wizard A is so far away, does this mean his spell can't be countered with a dispel magic? It makes sense to me that wizard B should be able to try to dispel the fireball as it flies over, but the spell says you can't dispel instantaneous effects. So as far as I can tell, dispel magic shouldn't work in this particular instance. Does that sound about right?
I bolded the important part. The dispel is targeting the spellcaster and not the spell so the spellcaster needs to be within range.
|
Because true counterspelling is very difficult to achieve due the CL issues I recommend counterspelling with damage.
You win initative and hold till enemy wizard starts casting.
Enemy wizard starts casting a spell. You spellcraft it and cast disintegrate in response. Wizard has crap fort save and take lots of damage losing the spell or being utterly turned to dust.
I think MeanMutton has the right of it.
It's a touch unfortunate, because I agree with Fruian that counterspelling using Dispel Magic is already difficult enough unless the character specializes somewhat.* Adding range issues certainly doesn't help, though i suspect this is probably more of a corner case than it might seem (at least in most campaigns).
*: I have been conceptualizing an Arcanist that could take a good crack at that sort of specialization, using the Potent Magic exploit, the Dispel Focus feat (and possibly Greater Dispel Focus), the Spell Specialization feat (albeit with the unfortunate feat tax of Spell Focus:Abjuration) and the Gifted Adept trait. Use Myrrh as a component for an additional bonus.
Collectively, you've got something like a +8 on the CL check (or +10 with Greater Dispel Focus), which should give a high chance of success in any CR appropriate encounter. You could go even higher if you picked up a feat like Varisian Tattoo, or otherwise eked out further CL boosts (such as via a certain ioun stone). And just imagine if you could pull off Spell Perfection...
Of course, that all ties up a huge chunk of a character's available feats on a single tactic, and it might be hard to fit in the metamagic feats necessary to get Spell Perfection anyways, even using the Metamagic Knowledge exploit(s). Plus you'd likely want a cool rider ability like Destructive Dispelling, which is another feat, and maybe even Dispel Synergy depending on party composition, which is yet another...
Anyways, this was a total tangent, but it does sort of support the point that dispelling is a difficult ability to pull off consistently without significant investment.