Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9862953" data-attributes="member: 29398">I like Counterspell as a spell but came to despise counterspell wars in MtG and never want to see them in D&amp;D.My solution: all spells take a certain amount of time to cast. Counterspell is faster than almost any other spell but is not (and cannot be) faster than itself, and you can't counter a spell that isn't being cast yet, therefore any attempt to Counterspell a Counterspell will always fail because casting your counter has to start after the other one starts*, thus by the time yours resolves the other one has already done its thing.&nbsp; First in, first out.* - put another way, you can't respond to something that isn't there to respond to.Yes this gives an advantage to the caster of the first counter.&nbsp; That's very intentional.&nbsp; The counter's caster is already using a resource to neutralize an enemy caster, spell for spell; I'm fine with that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 9862953, member: 29398"] I like [I]Counterspell[/I] as a spell but came to despise counterspell wars in MtG and never want to see them in D&D. My solution: all spells take a certain amount of time to cast. [I]Counterspell[/I] is faster than almost any other spell but is not (and cannot be) faster than itself, and you can't counter a spell that isn't being cast yet, therefore any attempt to [I]Counterspell[/I] a [I]Counterspell[/I] will always fail because casting your counter has to start after the other one starts*, thus by the time yours resolves the other one has already done its thing. First in, first out. * - put another way, you can't respond to something that isn't there to respond to. Yes this gives an advantage to the caster of the first counter. That's very intentional. The counter's caster is already using a resource to neutralize an enemy caster, spell for spell; I'm fine with that. [/QUOTE]

Verification