The Negator; the Spell-Breaker; The Mage-Slayer...

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm not involved in the playtest of 5Ed, but I have a wish: I hope 5Ed can make counter-spelling and the negation of magic (by casters and non-casters alike) effective and viable as a tactic, even to the point of being a PCs main shtick.

I've wanted this for a while, especially after playing M:tG, but have always been disappointed.

Is the any glimmer of decent anti-magic in 5Ed so far?

 

[Lanefan]

I'm not involved in the playtest of 5Ed, but I have a wish: I hope 5Ed can make counter-spelling and the negation of magic (by casters and non-casters alike) effective and viable as a tactic, even to the point of being a PCs main shtick.

I've wanted this for a while, especially after playing M:tG, but have always been disappointed.

Is the any glimmer of decent anti-magic in 5Ed so far?

Remains to be seen, I think. I've been banging the drum to at least have them go back to a 1e style where spells are very much more interruptable and risky than later editions, but so far not getting much traction.

Counterspelling a la the card game could be interesting particularly in the type of campaign where everyone's a spellcaster and can share in the fun. But otherwise it runs a serious risk of having caster types tie up the game with their own game within it.

I introduced some countering abilities in my game - there's a 2nd-level wizard spell called Counterspell that, well, does just that (and to avoid counter-battles I set it up such that a counterspell specifically cannot itself be countered); and a 3rd-level spell called Arcane Denial that cuts a target off from arcane energy for a while on a failed save.

Counterspell in whatever form almost forces spells to have casting times during which they can be countered; might not be so easy in a hard-turn-based system like 3e-4e.

Lan-"a +5 wizardslayer longsword works much better"-efan

 

[Neonchameleon]

Counterspell as a standard action is almost always weak in the action economy - it trades one of your actions for a chance at negating one of theirs. You need to do more than that to make counterspelling viable.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Counterspell as a standard action is almost always weak in the action economy - it trades one of your actions for a chance at negating one of theirs. You need to do more than that to make counterspelling viable.

I think nitch that works sometimes

 

[grimslade]

Counterspelling should be a simple action for action trade. It is not an exact trade if the spell countered is a daily resource. Countering should be at-will. So countering a Magic Missile is zero sum, countering a Burning Hands is an advantage for the counterer, because it burns a resource.
Other options might be burning off an on going spell effect or ignoring a spell effect.

Maybe a benefit of a Spell School system would be opposing schools being able to counter each other with a kicker. Maybe a Necromancer can counter a Conjurer's spell and deal some necrotic damage or weaken the spell caster.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Counterspelling should be a simple action for action trade. It is not an exact trade if the spell countered is a daily resource. Countering should be at-will. So countering a Magic Missile is zero sum, countering a Burning Hands is an advantage for the counterer, because it burns a resource.
Other options might be burning off an on going spell effect or ignoring a spell effect.

I'd actually go in almost the opposite direction here - make Counterspell a daily (wizard) spell, but make it a Reaction instead of a standard action. That way, you're paying a resource price tbecause it eats up a spell slot, but you're not giving up an action.

Alternately, there could be a feat that lets you burn a higher-level spell slot (than the enemy's spell) to counterspell as a reaction. (That way you don't have to prepare a bunch of Counterspells on the off-chance you encounter a wizard.)

 

[keterys]

Downside is you can lead to a whole lot of boring

I did that once in 3e - I won initiative with my sorcerer, hasted myself, then readied counterspells. Big bad couldn't cast anything, fight became ho-hum (that is to say, we stomped it, and he couldn't do anything about it)

Shoulda seen the DM's face when he realized his casting haste on the bad guy so he could cast 2 spells a round got countered and then the bad guy's turn was basically over. Forever.

 

[Stormonu]

Counterspell as a standard action is almost always weak in the action economy - it trades one of your actions for a chance at negating one of theirs. You need to do more than that to make counterspelling viable.

Yeah, that's one thing thats bothered me. We're seeing magic detection (ala detect magic) become an at-will 0-level sort of thing, but countering magic still takes up spell slots, actions and is a 3rd level spell (so we aren't even seeing it until character level 5).

I'd like to see some form of counterspelling from level 1, but at the same time I don't want it to dominate spellcasting play. Though it would be nice to spellcasters contesting against each other in battle while the martial vs. martial fights are going on. So long as the martial characters can do something to disrupt spells as well, I think it would overall be a good system.

Perhaps if countering could be made into some sort of system like a reactionary turn undead (but for eliminating spells instead of driving off spellcasters), that might work.

 

[Harlock]

Downside is you can lead to a whole lot of boring

I did that once in 3e - I won initiative with my sorcerer, hasted myself, then readied counterspells. Big bad couldn't cast anything, fight became ho-hum (that is to say, we stomped it, and he couldn't do anything about it)

Shoulda seen the DM's face when he realized his casting haste on the bad guy so he could cast 2 spells a round got countered and then the bad guy's turn was basically over. Forever.

I think it's even worse when you, as a player, are basically stopped cold in a fight because counter spelling is too easy (read at-will). Spells are a more limited resource than sword-swinging and when it is easier to stop a more limited resource it makes for a player who feels next to useless. It's a tough balance and I hope to see it left out of the core-kernel. If there was enough interest, I'd love to see it as a module so the folks who want it can use it, however.

 

[nightwyrm]

I'm not involved in the playtest of 5Ed, but I have a wish: I hope 5Ed can make counter-spelling and the negation of magic (by casters and non-casters alike) effective and viable as a tactic, even to the point of being a PCs main shtick.

I've wanted this for a while, especially after playing M:tG, but have always been disappointed.

Is the any glimmer of decent anti-magic in 5Ed so far?

This is actually kinda funny. If you're playing MtG, you know that that WotC has powered down counterspells a whole lot in the last decade or so. It seems casual players really hates playing against them (not as much as LD though).