D&D 5E Counterspell nerfed!

[overgeeked]

Why?

Because the new monster format has monsters not actually casting spells

Dungeons & Dragons Just Nerfed One of Its Most Popular Spells

A recent design change in Dungeons & Dragons had some unexpected consequences on a popular spell. [...]

comicbook.com

Good. PCs have way, way too many toys.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah I noticed that the other day. I would note, however, that at least for what we've seen the trend is mostly to pick one sort of mid-level spell attack that probably wouldn't be worth counterspelling anyway and make that a spell-like ability (the offbrand fireball of the hag in Witchlight notwithstanding).

Still, I wish they'd throw a "counts as a spell" clause on there. Not just for counterspellers but for all those other folks who have an ability that applies to spells and spells only, like say and Oath of Ancients Paladin. It seems like they're just setting DMs up to replace the time they would have spent looking up a spell with time they end up arguing with frustrated players.

Good point! Counterspell is best used to stop those big encounter-winning spells, rather than the occasional damage spell.

 

[SuperTD]

Counterspell only feels powerful because of the shock factor. Mechanically speaking it's a weaker Stun.

A weaker stun that only takes your reaction.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That seems to be a flaw to be corrected.

Maybe, but until then...I always hated counterspell.

 

[Mort]

A weaker stun that only takes your reaction.

And a 3+ level spell slot, and, if you're playing RAW, could accidentally stop a big ol' cantrip. And, assuming you do know the spell and it's big, the caster could counterspell your counterspell. Plus the conditions to counterspell are not that easy (within 60', must see the caster and must know they are casting a spell). Counterspell has its uses, but it's already quite limited.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

There are powerful non-spell magic abilities already, like portent, wildshape, channel divinity, and the like, so spellcasters have never really been restricted to just spells.

For something like the war priest, I think it's just to have a consistent combo that uses magic-y stuff without being as weak as a cantrip.

 

[MerricB]

Problem is that it also gets past magic resistance, etc., because nothing in the stat block says it's magical.

This is tremendously bad design.

 

[Krachek]

Hopefully there is a DM that runs the game!

 

[Bill Zebub]

On a related note, does anybody run spellcasting such that opponents don't automatically know what spell is being cast when they have to use their reaction? Perhaps there could be an arcana check to know what spell it is? (Although I would like there to be some cost to the arcana check...perhaps that in doing so you consume your reaction even if you don't cast Counterspell?)

Yes, this would be a pretty serious nerf to Counterspell, but I'd be ok with that. Even when I'm on the player side of the screen, Counterspell just seems too....easy.

 

[Mort]

On a related note, does anybody run spellcasting such that opponents don't automatically know what spell is being cast when they have to use their reaction? Perhaps there could be an arcana check to know what spell it is? (Although I would like there to be some cost to the arcana check...perhaps that in doing so you consume your reaction even if you don't cast Counterspell?)

Yes, this would be a pretty serious nerf to Counterspell, but I'd be ok with that. Even when I'm on the player side of the screen, Counterspell just seems too....easy.

That's actually RAW - most people just don't run it that way.

You can either use your reaction to counterspell OR you can use your reaction to identify the spell (requiring a DC 15 Arcana check), not both.