Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ainamacar" data-source="post: 6021203" data-attributes="member: 70709">Suppression, yep.&nbsp; We could move away from counterspelling requiring a major action, because that has been part of the problem.&nbsp; We already have abilities in 5e where one can do something special when taking an action, so that could be one promising avenue.&nbsp; A more comprehensive suppression might take an entire action while still avoiding the negation or nothing gamble, and it is just one option in a spectrum.&nbsp; As long as the effects can be applied easily, one can dream up 1000 ways for how they occur.&nbsp; That is a very different from traditional stances, where counterspelling is a procedure first and foremost.For example, maybe one form of counterspell would be usable every round after casting a spell, giving a moderate reduction in the effective level (or whatever) of a spell of the same school as that just cast.&nbsp; Like a wizard could remove nd6 damage from his fireball, but be able to spend that to suppress other evocation effects.&nbsp; That incentivizes the enemy to avoid evocation effects or softens the impact of an enemy cone-of-cold, but it isn't a hard counter.Creating interesting trade-offs for oneself and the enemy is what I want&nbsp; from counterspelling.&nbsp; At a basic level I think the art of the mage duel&nbsp; is influencing the enemy to cast the spell he doesn't&nbsp; want to cast, and counterspelling should be an important tool in that toolbox.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ainamacar, post: 6021203, member: 70709"] Suppression, yep. We could move away from counterspelling requiring a major action, because that has been part of the problem. We already have abilities in 5e where one can do something special when taking an action, so that could be one promising avenue. A more comprehensive suppression might take an entire action while still avoiding the negation or nothing gamble, and it is just one option in a spectrum. As long as the effects can be applied easily, one can dream up 1000 ways for how they occur. That is a very different from traditional stances, where counterspelling is a procedure first and foremost. For example, maybe one form of counterspell would be usable every round after casting a spell, giving a moderate reduction in the effective level (or whatever) of a spell of the same school as that just cast. Like a wizard could remove nd6 damage from his fireball, but be able to spend that to suppress other evocation effects. That incentivizes the enemy to avoid evocation effects or softens the impact of an enemy cone-of-cold, but it isn't a hard counter. Creating interesting trade-offs for oneself and the enemy is what I want from counterspelling. At a basic level I think the art of the mage duel is influencing the enemy to cast the spell he doesn't want to cast, and counterspelling should be an important tool in that toolbox. [/QUOTE]

Verification