D&D 5E Xanathar's and Counterspell

[Blue]

Perhaps. I still think that the initial Counterspell caster is at a significant disadvantage because they have no ability to make an informed decision regarding the expense of a useful resource (that Counterspell could be a Fireball) but anyone else who wants to Counterspell them, including the initial caster, all but knows that they're casting Counterspell. It seems like a cheap way to attrit player resources and makes the whole thing a wheel of fortune guessing game.

But that's true regardless if it's PCs or NPCs attempting to counterspell the counterspell.

 

[Caliban]

Fair enough. In that case, identifying the spell has been in rules limbo since the beginning of the game. Hence, unless the DM allowed you to know, you were counterspelling blindly.

And if you've been keeping up, you would know that I do in fact allow it when I am the DM.

Also, every DM I've played under has either just told us the spell they were casting or allowed an Arcana check. It's quick and easy and doesn't bog down play. I don't see any need to change it.

 

[Savage Wombat]

There wasn't a rule for counterspelling in early D&D because the way to prevent a spellcaster from casting was to hit them with a rock when they tried.

Magic Missile was always our go-to - with a casting time of 1, you could frequently break a caster's concentration even if they beat you on initiative.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

...Spells are complicated, spellcasters can't possibly know all spells, there are different types of spellcasting (a druid casting Flaming Sphere isn't necessarily going to look the same as a sorcerer casting Flaming Sphere). ...

I beg to differ. Couldn't a person who has one of the most fantastic mortal intellects in the world (Int 20) and having spent their entire lives studying magic and the arcane (so proficient in spellcasting and Arcana) have a good idea of the various schools and types of spellcasting? Wouldn't they have spent their lives pouring over tomes that describe just these sort of things? Isn't one reason they are adventurers is to travel the world seeking this sort of knowledge?

It seems patronizing to say that masters of a craft don't recognize variations in their art. It's like saying Bobby Fischer wouldn't be able to tell a Benko Gambit from a Grünfeld Defence, or Itzhak Perlman couldn't detect a flat note from an orchestra playing the Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto in D major, Op. 35. I know it's fashionable to denigrate PCs as bumbling murder hobos, but we should from time to time appreciate that they can indeed be quite good at what they do.

So I'm in favor of challenge. But it should be tough and fair. Hand waving it with statements like, "Your primitive intellect wouldn't understand alloys and compositions and things with... molecular structures." just seems so not D&D.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

But that's true regardless if it's PCs or NPCs attempting to counterspell the counterspell.

And that makes it right?

 

[Blue]

And that makes it right?

You started this with a complaint that PCs and NPCs weren't treated the same. I thought that was still the debate point we are on. In that context: yes, it is right since they are treated the same.

You can always make guesses on what the spell being cast is. If X casts and attack spell at Y and Y does a reaction spell, do you want to counterspell that reaction spell? It could be Counterspell. It could be Shield. But because it's from a very limited selection of reaction spells your guess is going to be much better. Yes, that is also right. (If it's a non-attack spell but does elemental damage, it could be Absorb Elements instead of Counterspell.)

 

[ClaytonCross]

Yeah, I'm gonna ignore that. I always let the PC identify a spell automatically if it is one they can cast themselves, or make a free action Arcana check to identify it if it isn't.

I agree with this and use it when I GM. However, the GM of the game I am currently playing has been known to say if he says the name its too late to counter spell because you to your time to identify it not counter it. The issue is he usually doesn't say "NPC A starts to cast a spell" he says "NPC A casts fireball". Making counter spell useless as a player.

 

[Caliban]

However, the GM of the game I am currently playing has been known to say if he says the name its too late to counter spell because you to your time to identify it not counter it. The issue is he usually doesn't say "NPC A starts to cast a spell" he says "NPC A casts fireball". Making counter spell useless as a player.

Well, that's just being a jerk.

 

[ClaytonCross]

Well, that's just being a jerk.

Well, that's true but it also comes from us doing things like massacre a CR6 wyvern with 3 players at level 3 (web + eldritch blast/hex causing disadvantage on strength checks to escape web + paladin smiting the crap out of it) , and in his defense the counter spells against say a long term boss trying to dimension door out with his last spell slot if allowed and successful would have meant we killed off a big part of his story because he wasn't ready for it as a first pick level 3 spell when we hit level 5. I think counter spell in general invokes panic moments in my GM because he forgets about it. So he in those moments of panic just says no because he has not thought of a way to save is evil plot or develop an alternate plot yet.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I like the DC 15 Arcana check rule of thumb. I like advantage if the spell is on your list. I'm ignoring the action part, because nit picking actions that only serve to inform the player are lame. I mean what other checks Should consume a reaction? Should Perception checks require a reaction? Frankly I don't want my game that gamist any more. Put the book down and roll the stupid dice and stop sweating the small stuff.