Level Up (A5E) Counterspell wording

[MarkB]

For counterspell, I'm a little unclear about how the target's Reaction option works.

"The creature can use its reaction to try to reshape the fraying magic and cast another spell with the same casting time so long as it uses a spell slot level equal to or less than half the original spell slot."​

There are two ways I can see that being read.

1. You salvage the spell slot you were using to cast the original spell, and cast a replacement spell of a level equal to half that spell's level or lower, still using the same slot, but it's treated as though it were cast using the lower-level slot.
2. You lose the slot, there's no salvaging it, but if you burn your reaction you at least get to do something on your turn - casting a spell using a lower-level slot. So you've lost two spell slots and a reaction, but at least you did something.

Which of these is correct?

Also, can you use the reaction to cast a cantrip? They're lower-level, but they don't use spell slots.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Those are good questions.

 

[Vexxmyst]

I feel that RAI it was meant to be 1, but RAW it's 2. 'Reshape the fraying magic' sounds as if it were salvaging it, but it says the new spell has to 'use a spell slot'. If it was intended to be cast with the same slot, I'd word it as "[...] so long as the spell being cast would use a spell slot level [...]"

As for cantrips, it states that a viable spell needs a slot, so I'd say as listed you cannot.

 

[Legendweaver]

Agreed, very confusing. Did you file an issue for this wording here?

I imagine they don't want to change it at this point, but I do feel the better fix would be to change this to just:
"The creature can use its reaction to try to reshape the fraying magic and cast a cantrip with the same casting time. "

...to prevent all sorts of unfortunate consequences like counterspelling a 9th-level plane shift just to have your foe still pull off a 4th level dimension door and escape. Imagine how anticlimactic that might have made CR S1 Ep 114....

 

[MarkB]

Agreed, very confusing. Did you file an issue for this wording here?

I imagine they don't want to change it at this point, but I do feel the better fix would be to change this to just:
"The creature can use its reaction to try to reshape the fraying magic and cast a cantrip with the same casting time. "

...to prevent all sorts of unfortunate consequences like counterspelling a 9th-level plane shift just to have your foe still pull off a 4th level dimension door and escape. Imagine how anticlimactic that might have made CR S1 Ep 114....

I haven't submitted it as an issue. I'll do so in the morning, rather than trying to navigate the form on my phone.

I like your fix, with the proviso that you can only use your reaction to cast a cantrip if the spell you were casting originally was not a cantrip.

 

[Legendweaver]

Right! I was assuming the preceeding wording about a level 2 or lower spell fizzling (without a chance to "reshape") covered that case: a cantrip is <= level 2, so no chance to cast something else!

 

[MarkB]

Right! I was assuming the preceeding wording about a level 2 or lower spell fizzling (without a chance to "reshape") covered that case: a cantrip is <= level 2, so no chance to cast something else!

That's an interpretation I didn't come to. I think the target gets to use the reaction if their spell is successfully countered, regardless of level.

 

[Legendweaver]

Mmm, perhaps another place to ask for clarification, then... If that's the intent, I guess my suggested rewording would be:

"If the original spell was not a cantrip, the creature can use its reaction to try to reshape the fraying magic and cast a cantrip with the same casting time."

 

[Whaleman]

I am also curious about this one. Mainly my confusion was about wether you need a new spell slot or not. I don't see the issue with using a counterspell on a cantrip and them casting a new cantrip. It may feel anticlimactic but in my experience my players would be more sad that they countered a cantrip then anything and its not like a cantrip is going to blow up the world (also they use their reaction which is a big deal in A5e).

 

[Legendweaver]

Well, my bigger point is that by always limiting the follow-up spell to cantrips, the caster still gets a consolation prize, but can't cast a nearly arbitrary alternate spell that might similar enough to the original spell to make the counterspell effectively meaningless (such as my plane shift vs. dimensions door example). There's also precedence for giving out extra cantrips per round (e.g. quickened spell), so it's a less-drastic exchange.

But the reason I agree a cantrip shouldn't get a second chance isn't the power level of the cantrip, but rather the cost to the counterspeller. If the counterspeller spends a 3d level (or higher slot) and their reaction to cancel a firebolt, it'd be really disappointing (and frankly unfair) for the original caster to just return with a ray of frost.