D&D 5E Counterspell - Do I know my foes' spell before I counter?

[The Crimson Binome]

Counterspell should be torn from the spell lists and hurled in the bog of eternal stench, never to be seen again.

When I was playing 3E and Pathfinder, I wished that they could have just made a simple Counterspell that was an immediate action to cast, because the whole "ready a Dispel to counterspell" thing was so annoying.

Having run 5E to sufficiently high levels, I can see why they never did that. It's just too convenient. Everything gets countered, all the time, and enemy spellcasters don't need to worry about their spell slots.

That's one reason I love Counterspell, it shifts caster duels from - "I won initiative, so I won the duel" - to "I won initiative but she might counter my first cast so... how the heck am I going to play this!?"

If you win initiative, and she counters your spell, then you can counter her counter and your original spell will go through. This is both RAW and confirmed RAI. The only issue is that, if you do counter their counter, then you won't be able to counter the spell she casts on her next turn, so you need to make sure that your first spell that you can guarantee goes through needs to be stronger than whatever she casts on her next turn.

 

[clearstream]

Having run 5E to sufficiently high levels, I can see why they never did that. It's just too convenient. Everything gets countered, all the time, and enemy spellcasters don't need to worry about their spell slots.

They do, it's just DMs sometimes run NPC spellcasters as if they have nothing to do but fight PCs.

If you win initiative, and she counters your spell, then you can counter her counter and your original spell will go through. This is both RAW and confirmed RAI. The only issue is that, if you do counter their counter, then you won't be able to counter the spell she casts on her next turn, so you need to make sure that your first spell that you can guarantee goes through needs to be stronger than whatever she casts on her next turn.

Our Sorcerer is permitted to cast her Counterspell at a higher level. So Holmwood could need to reserve his highest level spell slot for his Counter-Counterspell. That prevents him using that slot on his own spell. He ends up with a lot riding on his first cast as if she Counterspells his second highest level spell, and he counters with his highest, she is now guaranteed her highest level spell in return (if she survives his first!) Or he could try and draw out her most potent cast, relying on her failing her Arcana in return. Or he might back up and cast from beyond Counterspell's 60' range. Using Arcana checks in this sequence to identify spell and level adds interest (asymmetrical information).

Sorcerer 11th Int 8, Cha 16
4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 1
Arcana +0 (no prof)
Spell DC 15

Holmwood - Sorcerer, 11th, Cha 16
4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 1
Arcana +4 (prof)
Spell DC 15

In this case, if Holmwood wins initiative and throws his 6th level spell, Sorcerer can always Counterspell. Therefore Holmwood casts a 5th level spell, retaining his 6th slot for his Counterspell. You can see how Arcana checks add interest to this duel. If Sorcerer can't identify his cast, she must either rely on her saving throw (possibly losing right there) or consider Counterspelling with her highest slot; and she can't be sure what slots Holmwood will have remaining. Either could have Heightened Spell, allowing them to have 3/11 Sorcery Points riding on their first cast.

NB: I think we need to add that if there's any metamagic riding on a spell, an Arcana check gets that info too.

When both sides automatically have full info, the duel is less interesting and more predetermined. Holmwood gets no really crunchy benefit for his choice in character creation.

 

[clearstream]

Having run 5E to sufficiently high levels, I can see why they never did that. It's just too convenient. Everything gets countered, all the time, and enemy spellcasters don't need to worry about their spell slots.

From your earlier posts I understand that you don't call for ability checks to identify spell and spell level as it is being cast. Is that right?

With perfect information, everyone always knows when to counter. I believe that leads to (or at the very least, exacerbates) the degeneracy you describe. Maybe try it the other way for awhile (DC 12 Arcana or Religion) and see how that goes.

 

[clearstream]

Hi,

let's say, I don't want to waste my Counterspell to interrupt an enemy casting a Cantrip, but I do want to prevent him from casting e.g. a Fireball. Is it possible to find out what spell is being cast by my foe, so I can decide whether or not I cast Counterspell?

For example, I am having in mind to use the Arcana ability check for that. On the other hand, if I start to allow that, I am sure my Players will ask for that check for ANY spell. Therefore, to speed up the game, I would also be an option to automatically tell them and give them the opportunity to counter or not.

How would you rule that?

Thanks in advance!

Another reason to call for checks is that - as Saelorn describes - everything gets countered all the time if you allow automatic full knowledge. Counterspelling sometimes "in the dark" will foreseeably reduce that tendency.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

From your earlier posts I understand that you don't call for ability checks to identify spell and spell level as it is being cast. Is that right?

With perfect information, everyone always knows when to counter. I believe that leads to (or at the very least, exacerbates) the degeneracy you describe. Maybe try it the other way for awhile (DC 12 Arcana or Religion) and see how that goes.

I can't imagine that it would change anything, honestly. If the PC wizard casts a spell, then the NPC wizard is going to try and counter it regardless of whether that's a cantrip or a Fireball. The average combat lasts for fewer rounds than the NPC spellcaster has Counterspell slots available.

The most it might do is if the PC casts a cantrip, then after the NPC counters it, the PC won't counter that counter (because it was just a cantrip). That way, on the NPCs next turn when it casts a powerful spell (not a cantrip, because NPCs don't have to worry about running out of spell slots), then the PC will still have their reaction available to counter that powerful spell from the NPC (where otherwise they would have already spent their reaction). And of course, the NPC will counter that counter, because they got their reaction back on their turn... but then the NPC won't have their reaction available to counter the spell that the PC casts on their next turn... which probably won't even happen, because it's been two rounds and now the encounter is over (or the NPC is dead, so they wouldn't have been able to counter anyway).

But in the best case scenario, where the NPC spellcaster is still up and active on that second round, and is now deprived of their reaction, the PC can finally cast one powerful spell successfully on their second turn of combat... as compared to the alternative situation, where they cast their powerful spell on the first round of combat, and simply counter that first counterspell. There's no real obvious point to feinting with a cantrip, even in a scenario of imperfect knowledge.

 

[clearstream]

I can't imagine that it would change anything, honestly. If the PC wizard casts a spell, then the NPC wizard is going to try and counter it regardless of whether that's a cantrip or a Fireball. The average combat lasts for fewer rounds than the NPC spellcaster has Counterspell slots available.

The positive consequences of hidden and asymmetrical information are coming to be well understood for games. Hiding information greatly increases the subtlety and nuance of decision-making. Conversely, open information has a tendency to make decisions trivial (not always, but there is a reason why cards are held concealed in hands, units are hidden by fog of war, and so on).

The most it might do is if the PC casts a cantrip, then after the NPC counters it, the PC won't counter that counter (because it was just a cantrip). That way, on the NPCs next turn when it casts a powerful spell (not a cantrip, because NPCs don't have to worry about running out of spell slots), then the PC will still have their reaction available to counter that powerful spell from the NPC (where otherwise they would have already spent their reaction). And of course, the NPC will counter that counter, because they got their reaction back on their turn... but then the NPC won't have their reaction available to counter the spell that the PC casts on their next turn... which probably won't even happen, because it's been two rounds and now the encounter is over (or the NPC is dead, so they wouldn't have been able to counter anyway).

For me there are two issues with that scenario. First, the NPC spellcaster is frequently sole caster against multiple PC casters. A perfectly matched, 1:1 back and forth, doesn't match my experience. More often they're outnumbered. Frequently there are other (non-caster) foes, interfering with the perfect conservation of reactions. Secondly, our NPC spellcaster should have other business besides dealing with PCs (there are always exceptions, of course, maybe today they really are her focus). What spells did she already need to cast ? What does she know she needs to keep in reserve if at all possible?

Setting that aside, nothing about the situation described diminishes the value of rolling to identify spell and level. And as soon as it expands to include other actors, the value of rolling increases.

But in the best case scenario, where the NPC spellcaster is still up and active on that second round, and is now deprived of their reaction, the PC can finally cast one powerful spell successfully on their second turn of combat... as compared to the alternative situation, where they cast their powerful spell on the first round of combat, and simply counter that first counterspell. There's no real obvious point to feinting with a cantrip, even in a scenario of imperfect knowledge.

Try it. See whether what you expect to happen is the same as what happens.

 

[Psikerlord#]

When I was playing 3E and Pathfinder, I wished that they could have just made a simple Counterspell that was an immediate action to cast, because the whole "ready a Dispel to counterspell" thing was so annoying.

Having run 5E to sufficiently high levels, I can see why they never did that. It's just too convenient. Everything gets countered, all the time, and enemy spellcasters don't need to worry about their spell slots.If you win initiative, and she counters your spell, then you can counter her counter and your original spell will go through. This is both RAW and confirmed RAI. The only issue is that, if you do counter their counter, then you won't be able to counter the spell she casts on her next turn, so you need to make sure that your first spell that you can guarantee goes through needs to be stronger than whatever she casts on her next turn.

Exactly this. It's woeful and should have been eliminated in playtesting. And that's with only one enemy (or PC) counterspeller... it basically just removes combat magic from the game (sigh)

 

[clearstream]

Exactly this. It's woeful and should have been eliminated in playtesting. And that's with only one enemy (or PC) counterspeller... it basically just removes combat magic from the game (sigh)

You're also giving full information without a check, right?

 

[Nutation]

Just one last question: Do you also tell them, what level the spell has, so the players can decide whether or not they want to use a higher spell slot for Counterspell?

I run games for counterspell-happy Adventurer's League players, and this is what I do. I announce the spell slot and never the actual spell. That gives the would-be counterspell caster the opportunity to decide what spell slot to use in reaction and whether to gamble on a caster check or not. Things move quickly with a bit of suspense and mystery.

 

[clearstream]

I run games for counterspell-happy Adventurer's League players, and this is what I do. I announce the spell slot and never the actual spell. That gives the would-be counterspell caster the opportunity to decide what spell slot to use in reaction and whether to gamble on a caster check or not. Things move quickly with a bit of suspense and mystery.

You say you find Counterspells egregious, DM'd as you do, right? I feel like announcing the spell-slot for free could be a mistake. It means they never risk throwing away a higher spell slot on a lower. And they could keep track of whats left in the tank.

Coming into this thread, I didn't think very hard about spell slot and metamagic, only spell name. But I believe now that all three are important hidden information.