Can a Ring of Couterspells, with Greater Dispel Magic on, counterspell a non-Greater Dispel Magic?

[Gray Warden]

Sorry for the mouthful. Does Dispel Magic count as a different spell relatively to Greater Dispel Magic for the purposes of activating a Ring of Counterspells?

Relevant rules:

Ring of Counterspells:

Upon first examination, this ring seems to be a ring of spell storing. However, while it allows a single spell of 1st through 6th level to be cast into it, that spell cannot be cast out of the ring again. Instead, should that spell ever be cast upon the wearer, the spell is immediately countered, as a counterspell action, requiring no action (or even knowledge) on the wearer’s part. Once so used, the spell cast within the ring is gone. A new spell (or the same one as before) may be placed into it again.

Dispel Magic:

You can use dispel magic to end one ongoing spell that has been cast on a creature or object, to temporarily suppress the magical abilities of a magic item, or to counter another spellcaster’s spell. A dispelled spell ends as if its duration had expired. Some spells, as detailed in their descriptions, can’t be defeated by dispel magic. Dispel magic can dispel (but not counter) spell-like effects just as it does spells. The effect of a spell with an instantaneous duration can’t be dispelled, because the magical effect is already over before the dispel magic can take effect.

You choose to use dispel magic in one of two ways: a targeted dispel or a counterspell.

Targeted Dispel: One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell. You make one dispel check (1d20 + your caster level) and compare that to the spell with highest caster level (DC = 11 + the spell’s caster level). If successful, that spell ends. If not, compare the same result to the spell with the next highest caster level. Repeat this process until you have dispelled one spell affecting the target, or you have failed to dispel every spell.

For example, a 7th-level caster casts dispel magic, targeting a creature affected by stoneskin (caster level 12th) and fly (caster level 6th). The caster level check results in a 19. This check is not high enough to end the stoneskin (which would have required a 23 or higher), but it is high enough to end the fly (which only required a 17). Had the dispel check resulted in a 23 or higher, the stoneskin would have been dispelled, leaving the fly intact. Had the dispel check been a 16 or less, no spells would have been affected.

You can also use a targeted dispel to specifically end one spell affecting the target or one spell affecting an area (such as a wall of fire). You must name the specific spell effect to be targeted in this way. If your caster level check is equal to or higher than the DC of that spell, it ends. No other spells or effects on the target are dispelled if your check is not high enough to end the targeted effect.

If you target an object or creature that is the effect of an ongoing spell (such as a monster summoned by summon monster), you make a dispel check to end the spell that conjured the object or creature.

If the object that you target is a magic item, you make a dispel check against the item’s caster level (DC = 11 + the item’s caster level). If you succeed, all the item’s magical properties are suppressed for 1d4 rounds, after which the item recovers its magical properties. A suppressed item becomes nonmagical for the duration of the effect. An interdimensional opening (such as a bag of holding) is temporarily closed. A magic item’s physical properties are unchanged: A suppressed magic sword is still a sword (a masterwork sword, in fact). Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.

You automatically succeed on your dispel check against any spell that you cast yourself.

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.

Greater Dispel Magic:

This spell functions like dispel magic, except that it can end more than one spell on a target and it can be used to target multiple creatures.

You choose to use greater dispel magic in one of three ways: a targeted dispel, area dispel, or a counterspell:

Targeted Dispel: This functions as a targeted dispel magic, but it can dispel one spell for every four caster levels you possess, starting with the highest level spells and proceeding to lower level spells.

Additionally, greater dispel magic has a chance to dispel any effect that remove curse can remove, even if dispel magic can’t dispel that effect. The DC of this check is equal to the curse’s DC.

Area Dispel: When greater dispel magic is used in this way, the spell affects everything within a 20-foot-radius burst. Roll one dispel check and apply that check to each creature in the area, as if targeted by dispel magic. For each object within the area that is the target of one or more spells, apply the dispel check as with creatures. Magic items are not affected by an area dispel.

For each ongoing area or effect spell whose point of origin is within the area of the greater dispel magic spell, apply the dispel check to dispel the spell. For each ongoing spell whose area overlaps that of the greater dispel magic spell, apply the dispel check to end the effect, but only within the overlapping area.

If an object or creature that is the effect of an ongoing spell (such as a monster summoned by summon monster) is in the area, apply the dispel check to end the spell that conjured that object or creature (returning it whence it came) in addition to attempting to dispel one spell targeting the creature or object.

You may choose to automatically succeed on dispel checks against any spell that you have cast.

Counterspell: This functions as dispel magic, but you receive a +4 bonus on your dispel check to counter the other spellcaster’s spell.

[Scavion]

Yes. It is a different spell. You scribe two different spells into the spell book. A spontaneous caster has two use two different spells known to obtain them.

[Cavall]

Different spell.

[Meirril]

Dispel Magic and Greater Dispel Magic are two different spells. Being immune to one doesn't make you immune to the other.

Just like no matter how much metamagic you apply to a spell, being immune to the base spell makes you immune to the final form unless one of the modifiers overcomes the immunity somehow.

Target also matters a great deal in this case. If someone casts Greater Dispel Magic on someone using a Ring of Counterspells with GDM in the ring it probably stops the GDM...if the GDM is targeted at the wearer. But if the GDM specifically targets a spell cast on the wearer, it won't trigger.

Like lets say our wearer X has a Globe of Invulnerability on them. Caster Y wants to get rid of it. Y could cast GDM targeting just the Globe of Invulnerability and that doesn't target X so the ring doesn't work. Though since GDM generally removes 3 buffs if you target something wiht buffs, the normal use would be to target X and not the GoInvulnerability directly.

[Gray Warden]

I find the difference between targeting the wearer and the spell quite silly, and I don't believe this is how it works, as written nor as intended. To me, it seems that if you use Dispel Magic to target a spell, and the spell is on the wearer of the ring, you are still casting it "upon the wearer" for the purposes of activating the ring's effect.

If that wasn't the case, then the ring would become almost useless. Buffs cast during a fight can be easily identified using Spellcraft, and most buffs cast before combat can be inferred anyway, either via Knowledge[Arcana] (both popular skills on spellcasters), or simply because self evident. Occasions when someone will use a Dispel Magic blindly are actually fairly rare, as they can always pinpoint buffs worth dispelling. What's the point of having 50% of my ring slots occupied, if then I can get my Mirror Image dispelled anyway?

It's a one-per-combat item which also takes up an important item slot. I believe this interpretation is both consistent with RAW and game mechanics in general.

[Meirril]

To be fair, Ring of Counterspells is almost useless. Quite simply the effect is too narrow to be worth the cost. But hey, if you know the enemy uses Enervation then it isn't so bad.

If you follow Gray Warden's interpretation it makes the combination of (minor) Globe of Invulnerability + Ring of Counterspells w/GDM over powered. If you follow the interpretation that dispel and greater dispel are going after the person wiht the buff on them, they are immune to Dispel Magic since either Globe will stop a 3rd level spell and the Ring will eat the first Greater Dispel Magic.

Considering that someone is using a 6th level spell to react to a spell your BG has already cast, or your BG is wasting an action to get rid of a buff that is already bad action economy. Instead of casting a spell that could outright kill the opponent, you're making the fight take longer. This sort of thing is usually necessary for end of campaign bosses, but most opponents should be able to be killed without GDM.

Also Ring of Counterspells isn't the only way to stop GDM. I can't remember the name but there is a spell that will prevent the first dispel from working, not that most people would want to burn an action during combat to cast it.

And again, worse with Gray Warden's interpretation you could use Spell Immunity to be immune to Dispel Magic and GDM if you allowed that interpretation.

[Gray Warden]

Meirril wrote:

And again, worse with Gray Warden's interpretation you could use Spell Immunity to be immune to Dispel Magic and GDM if you allowed that interpretation.

Except for the fact that Spell Immunity doesn't work against Dispel Magic, because it does not call for Spell Resistance.

Meirril wrote:

To be fair, Ring of Counterspells is almost useless. Quite simply the effect is too narrow to be worth the cost. But hey, if you know the enemy uses Enervation then it isn't so bad.

Well, this is your assumption. And it is for spells such as Enervation that you would use Spell Immunity anyway.

Meirril wrote:

Considering that someone is using a 6th level spell to react to a spell your BG has already cast, or your BG is wasting an action to get rid of a buff that is already bad action economy.

This is true only for the first Greater Dispel Magic of the day, and assuming the day before was not an adventuring day or was not expended from previous days. So, on a regular adventuring day, with multiple combats, following a previous adventuring day with multiple combats, you are still spending the same amount of 6th level spell slots that the enemy is spending on you.

The rest is all circumstantial. Using a 4th level spell to be immune to 3rd level ones is what Lesser Globe of Invulnerability is for, regardless of how the ring works, and it is hardly game-breaking, since you hardly see it abused. The ring will just make the enemy waste ONE (1) Greater Dispel Magic, at the cost of half your ring slots: if they had only one Greater Dispel Magic prepared, then it was a good investment; if they are spontaneous casters or have more then one prepared, then it was not a great investment, since one ring slot (and possibly one 6th level spell that day) is not worth one turn delay on having your buffs dispelled anyway. Again, hardly game-breaking and consistent with how the ring seems to be intended to work: it's a once-per-combat safety net against a specific spell, no need to add restrictions.

[Meirril]

Gray Warden wrote:

Meirril wrote:

Considering that someone is using a 6th level spell to react to a spell your BG has already cast, or your BG is wasting an action to get rid of a buff that is already bad action economy.

This is true only for the first Greater Dispel Magic of the day, and assuming the day before was not an adventuring day or was not expended from previous days. So, on a regular adventuring day, with multiple combats, following a previous adventuring day with multiple combats, you are still spending the same amount of 6th level spell slots that the enemy is spending on you.

What does an adventuring day have to do with action economy? Action economy measures the effect of your actions, round by round, on the combat. Taking actions that shorten combat have "good" economy. Taking actions that largely don't have an impact on combat are definitely "bad".

Using a spell that could kill the monster instead of removing a buff has better action economy.

As a general rule, trying to remove buffs is a bad action. Most buffs have a minor effect on combat. The only times it becomes a good action is when the boss or character has a major buff on them that prevents the majority of actors from participating. Even then, throwing Dispel Magic isn't a guaranteed win. On a "normal" fight its 50/50. Player vs Boss encounter the Boss should have a higher caster level. Even without the ring of counterspells it is an uphill climb.

On the other hand, if done by a player this sounds more like a player using some sort of crutch spell to trample his game. One that wants to make sure the GM doesn't ruin things by making sure they are difficult to dispel.

Generally as a GM it isn't a good idea to be throwing around dispel magic unless your players are being obnoxious. Everyone is use to taking damage, and having conditions dropped on them. Being hit with a dispel on your buffs is an unusual cruelness and because it happens so infrequently it feels malicious. Though if you have a player being extra abusive maybe it should happen frequently.

[Ryze Kuja]

@OP

Ring of Counterspells can have any spell inside the ring, and that's what it counterspells if it is ever targeted with that spell. Dispel and Greater Dispel are two entirely different spells, as one is a lvl 3 spell and the other is a lvl 6 spell. Similar name, but no, not the same spell. So yes, you would need to choose to either have Dispel or Greater Dispel prepared in the Ring of Counterspells, and it would counter that spell thusly.