Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
Oh this reminds me in Chainmail... "Wizards are themselves impervious to normal missile fire"
The earliest incarnation of the shield spell presumably
D&D 5E Counterspell what do people think?
Oh this reminds me in Chainmail... "Wizards are themselves impervious to normal missile fire"
The earliest incarnation of the shield spell presumably
WaterRabbit
Explorer
Oh this reminds me in Chainmail... "Wizards are themselves impervious to normal missile fire"
The earliest incarnation of the shield spell presumably
Protection from Normal Arrows I would imagine. I played a few mass D&D combats and that spell is a must for wizards -- otherwise they get gunned down in seconds.
I would just like to point out that Bards are awesome at Counterspell, even though it is not on their list. They almost never have to spend a slot higher the third, as it is an ability check with a max DC of 19 (for a ninth level spell) to counter. Add in a Bard's expertise (not to mention things like Glibness at high levels), and they can be pretty much assured of pulling off a Counterspell anytime it applies. With a third level slot. Only Abjuration Wizards with their 10th level feature compete here.
Swarmkeeper
Hero
Expertise in Charisma? Am I missing something?
Glibness and CHA of 20, though, [BORAT VOICE]it's a verry niice[/BORAT VOICE]
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
That's it!!
I even had a "pyromancer" who flavored it as burning up the arrows as they struck in 1e days.
They don't get expertise, but they do get to add their jack of all trades ability to it.
WaterRabbit
Explorer
Awesome at a spell that has little use is still of little use. Divine casters are more susceptible to counterspell than arcane. However, it is usually the PCs that are on the offense in most games. If the PCs are going into a lair they are better served by Dispel Magic and Detect Magic than Counterspell.
So if PCs are able to routinely use counterspell, then the DM is not playing smart spellcasting opponents -- which is fine if your group likes push over/simple encounters. However, intelligent spellcasters in their lairs will only be seen by PCs when they have either run out of spells, they are dead, or through clever play and tactics they get the drop on the spellcaster. In all of these cases, counterspell is of no help.
Take a wizard for example. A wizard can cas Alarm on a choke point in his lair. As a ritual, this doesn't cost any resources but time. In fact there isn't a restriction on how many Alarm spells could be cast other than the casting time and duration.
So if the PCs aren't using Detect Magic and then Dispel Magic to find in place spells, the Alarm goes off alerting the wizard. The wizard then retreats to his sanctum, which is hidden, barred, locked, and Arcane Locked. Knock can only remove one at a time. The sanctum has peepholes and such so the wizard can see out. From that point forward, the wizard has total cover and cannot be seen, yet has total visibility to the rest of the room. Is he doing this because of counterspell? No. This is a setup that prevents the wizard from being attacked at all. By the time the PCs can get to him, he has exhausted his spells and is working on escape.
Even better at high levels since he can just have a gem in a chandelier inside the room of interest and use Magic Jar to possess intruders and using their own against themselves.
My point here is that NPCs, played intelligently, have little concern over counterspell as they have to take countermeasures already against ranged and melee attacks. So again encounter design determines if this spell is useful or not.
So a Bard. Unless the campaign is full of opportunities to counterspell, why would a bard use up a know spell slot on this? It is a spell at best they will cast infrequently. Since this is one of their Magical Secrets, of all of the spells 5th level and below, they are going to take counterspell? Really? Or a Lore Bard with Additional Magical Secrets of all of the 3rd level spells they could take this would be their choice? Really? Out of the 30 possible spells (8 of which can be non-bard) this is the one spell that is the must have?
The Sorcerer. A sorcerer knows 15 spells max, so it seems even less likely for them to learn this spell. The case is the same for the Warlock.
So, counterspell is really only a choice for two spell casters: wizard and redemption paladins (which they get at 9th). So a party that has more than one member that can cast counterspell is an outlier. Even if the party was composed of a wizard, warlock, sorcerer, bard, arcane trickster, and eldritch knight, it would be unusual for all of them to have counterspell unless the opportunities to cast it were so frequent that other 3rd level spells paled in comparison.
Which leads us back to encounter design and frequency of spellcasting encounters. Which then leads back to why nerf a 3rd level spell that isn't used that frequently to begin with because it is situationally dependent?
[MENTION=2445]WaterRabbit[/MENTION] Yes, I think it is fair to say that a well prepared wizard in their lair is quite a tough nut to crack. Between all the preparation you outline, not to mention the versatility of things like Glyph spells prepared ahead of time, it can be quite an ordeal to get to them. That said, I've never seen this done. Not once. I've seen message board posts describing such as possible, and maybe one or two precautions in play, but never this 'D&D taken to the logical extreme.' I've seen some min/maxing, & power gaming on the player side, sure. But at the end of the day, there's usually some adventure, a villain who may or may not monologue a bit, and a big set piece battle. I freely admit that I do not have the breadth and depth of experience that others here may have, but I don't think I'm all that much of an outlier.
I think the point is that in some games, it is not and infrequently used spell, your sermon on encounter design notwithstanding. For me personally, it adds a mini-game to the game that I, personally, don't find all that engaging. I don't want to nerf it so much as question the need to even have it at all.
I think the point is that in some games, it is not and infrequently used spell, your sermon on encounter design notwithstanding. For me personally, it adds a mini-game to the game that I, personally, don't find all that engaging. I don't want to nerf it so much as question the need to even have it at all.
WaterRabbit
Explorer
My point was that spellcasters, particularly wizards, do not want reciprocal line of sight as that generally gets them killed. There are many ways to achieve this both in and out of their lair. I can see that if someone doesn't want to run wizards as intelligent heroes or villains then then it would be natural for PCs to gravitate toward this spell if there were large numbers of encounters with spellcasters.
If you think what I have outlined is "logical extreme", well this is just the tip of the iceberg of dirty tricks in the wizard's bag -- even with how badly wizards were nerfed compared to 1st, 2nd, and 3rd editions.
However, it seems you have created your own solution, don't allow the spell at your table. But to have a spellcaster heavy group that have all committed to taking this spell and have the opportunity to regularly use it to the point where it become a mini-game of concern? Yes, that is an outlier.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Exhausted his spells on what? He can see out, but the door is still in the way so he has no line of effect to anyone. From the PHB, "To target something, you must have a clear path to it,so it can’t be behind total cover." Now, the following sentence does say can't see and blocked, but the prior indicates that blocked is enough, so the DM will have to rule on the contradiction. There's a very good chance that the wizard just trapped himself and twiddles his thumbs. At least if you have a fair DM.
There are also other spells besides knock that will get the party through that door or block vision so that that the wizard definitely cannot cast spells and his escape is out to the party.
For someone who made such bad assumptions about my ability to design an encounter, yours isn't very good. I would have thought you'd be an expert at encounter design, what with the way you were throwing rocks in a glass house.
