D&D 5E Do you allow a spell to be identified before counterspelling?

[cmad1977]

So, counterspell is coming up more and more in my group. I've been letting the spellcasters know the spell cast before counterspelling.

But I'm thinking of stopping that. Basically they know a spell is cast, and they have to decide whether to counterspell before knowing it (This is per Xanathar's).

Thoughts on either way?

I might let them know the power level of the spell? Maybe they can feel the arcane energies are more powerful than a standard counter spell so the player can make a call about wether or not they want to upcast or take a chance on counter spell failing.

But I DEFINITELY would NOT roll arcana checks mid combat. Don’t slow things down.

Or maybe not tell them altogether.

 

[turnip_farmer]

Then I really hated using against the players too, as not only am I taking out their action, but their spell slot too.

Isn't that the whole point?

 

[TheSword]

I’d actually allow a caster an optional rule where if they cast a spell it can be identified as part of the counterspell, but the original caster has an option to use a higher spell slot to cast. The caster counter spelling can then have the option to put more power in as well. Like raising in poker. This continues until one side can’t put more power in, in which case the result is resolved.

I think this would be more satisfying than counter spelling a counterspell which just seems a battle of numbers not power.

 

[Rune]

Actually I think your idea makes less sense than also including a reaction as in Xanthar's. To me it is all about time. In roughly 6 seconds you get your turn + reaction. If I am taking the time to study a caster's spell, when would I also have the time then cast my own spell (on top of everything I am doing on my turn). Now, I could see circumventing this if a ready action. So if ready a spell casting and then use my reaction to decipher a spell I could cast counterspell with my readied action. Also, I could see improving as you get higher in level. So at some point you can identify and cast counterspell with the same reaction if you want. I just wouldn't make that the default.

That makes no sense. Readied actions use your reaction and so does the casting time of counterspell (which has a specific trigger that does not require a readied action). You can’t use a reaction to decipher a spell and then also cast counterspell in the same turn! The rules forbid it!

Additionally, counterspell’s trigger does not require that you know what the spell being cast is, only that you see it being cast (and note that it’s see, and not hear).

For these reason’s it’s clear that the rule for identifying spells found in Xanathar’s Guide does not work in conjunction with counterspell. They are mutually exclusive (re)actions.

 

[TwoSix]

I let them make Arcana checks to identify the spell, but I don't let them know what level spell slot it's being cast at. And I upcast all the time. So they gamble as to what level they want to cast the counterspell at.

 

[Stalker0]

Why? Most intelligent foes will spread out because of area effects, they are adjusting their behavior due to the presence of magic. That casters, the most magical, are the ones most likely to have their behavior impacted by magic.

Damage is damage, but knocking out the action economy is one of the most powerful things you can do in combat. I would much rather my guy get hit with a fireball than get his key spell that shapes the fight counterspelled. And I didn't ban it lightly, as I said I tried various versions over 3 campaigns before I finally just said "I don't like this spell, I don't want to have to deal with this spell, and so I won't".

But lets not take the thread too Off Topic, the OP asked how people handle counterspell. I choose the "other" option, with the option being a ban.

 

[MGibster]

Damage is damage, but knocking out the action economy is one of the most powerful things you can do in combat. I would much rather my guy get hit with a fireball than get his key spell that shapes the fight counterspelled.

I hadn't thought about it from that perspective but I think you're making a valid point. I've certainly seen the look of disappointment on the faces of players when their Fireball spell fell prey to Counterspell. But I'm the type of DM who thrives on the tears of my players so I never really gave it much thought until now.

I was really disappointed when one of my player's characters, a Cleric, had the ability to cancel critical hits. It just sapped some of the fun out of combat for me and it's an ability I'd never give to a bad guy. Rolling crits is fun!

 

[dave2008]

That makes no sense. Readied actions use your reaction and so does the casting time of counterspell (which has a specific trigger that does not require a readied action). You can’t use a reaction to decipher a spell and then also cast counterspell in the same turn! The rules forbid it!

I was not trying to suggest it was RAW. I was saying that is something I would allow.

Additionally, counterspell’s trigger does not require that you know what the spell being cast is, only that you see it being cast (and note that it’s see, and not hear).

I never said it did. The idea was you might want to know what spell is being casts before you waste a counterspell on it. That is the who idea behind this thread. So if the villain is casting a spell that does poison damage and your immune to poison, does it make sense to counterspell it?

For these reason’s it’s clear that the rule for identifying spells found in Xanathar’s Guide does not work in conjunction with counterspell. They are mutually exclusive (re)actions.

Yes, I agree. I even said that is how we play. I simple suggested a way I would allow you to both identify a spell and also cast counterspell. My suggestion is not RAW, but it seems in the spirit of the game to me and I would allow it.

 

[dave2008]

Damage is damage, but knocking out the action economy is one of the most powerful things you can do in combat. I would much rather my guy get hit with a fireball than get his key spell that shapes the fight counterspelled. And I didn't ban it lightly, as I said I tried various versions over 3 campaigns before I finally just said "I don't like this spell, I don't want to have to deal with this spell, and so I won't".

But lets not take the thread too Off Topic, the OP asked how people handle counterspell. I choose the "other" option, with the option being a ban.

Not sure what variants you tried, but to me it might make sense to say after you use counterspell, you can't cast a spell on your next turn.

I think the idea of counterspell is such an iconic part of magic users that I would hate to see it taken out completely.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I eyeball whether they’d just know the spell, based on spells they know, level, if I’ve used it against them before, etc.

If they don’t auto-recognize it, they can roll arcana, religion, nature, or a Spellcasting check, to determine if they know it.

If they have detect magic active, they gain the detect magic info and have advantage to determine the exact spell.