Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 2207231" data-attributes="member: 3400">I wouldn't be surprised if most people tend to discount the usefulness of counterspelling until they see it used effectively. And it can be effective, as the DM in one game I play proved.We were facing a wizard of a level a bit higher than our own. He was armed with a few low-level spells that were quickened. He also had some muscle to fend off the party fighter. He basically sat back and counterspelled our sorcerer while tossing off some quickened attacks. It was fairly difficult to prevent the neutralization of our sorcerer.This DM has also given us trouble with counterspelling from a small army of kobolds, well-sprinkled with sorcerers. Because their own spell power was relatively low, they weren't counted on as artillery, they mostly held back and countered enemy attempts to magic missile their own leaders. It was also very effective.Anyway, I think counterspelling is one of those things that is hard to coordinate unless you get a lot of cooperation from your fellow players. It helps to have a wizard/sorcerer with a high initiative modifier, muscle to keep people from getting to him, and the patience to use the tactic. I think it could work pretty well in a party with > 4 PCs. A redundant spell-caster, depending on expected opposition, could concentrate on countering enemy spells and get some good mileage out of it.</blockquote>