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

[Gadget]

I may be in the minority, but I've never cared for 5e's Counterspell; I feel it bogs down the game and adds a sub-game that is not needed. I preferred the previous edition's method of readying a Dispel Magic against an enemies possible spell attack.

Having said that, It seems obvious to me that the intention of the Counterspell rules is to have some risk and uncertainty involved. Giving players the exact spell and level being used against them makes the choice of counterspell somewhat of a no brainer: "Oh, he's casting Frost Fingers, no problem!" Or, "He's busting out Disintegrate, better counterspell, with the right level." As it is, Abjurers and Bards who have picked up the spell via Magical Secrets rarely need to invest in higher level spell slots due to advantage those classes have on the check.

 

[Mort]

I may be in the minority, but I've never cared for 5e's Counterspell; I feel it bogs down the game and adds a sub-game that is not needed. I preferred the previous edition's method of readying a Dispel Magic against an enemies possible spell attack.

Having said that, It seems obvious to me that the intention of the Counterspell rules is to have some risk and uncertainty involved. Giving players the exact spell and level being used against them makes the choice of counterspell somewhat of a no brainer: "Oh, he's casting Frost Fingers, no problem!" Or, "He's busting out Disintegrate, better counterspell, with the right level." As it is, Abjurers and Bards who have picked up the spell via Magical Secrets rarely need to invest in higher level spell slots due to advantage those classes have on the check.

The problem with 3e/3.5e counterspelling is that it was clunky, risky (you either had to know the exact spell they were going to cast OR try your luck with a dispell magic) and took up so much action economy (you had to use your action to ready the counterspell) that I never saw it used (And that's from playing from nearly the day 3e came out DMing weekly sessions with multiple spellcasters).

It was too far on the other end!

 

[Teemu]

It was mainly the second. My players would always have someone who could counterspell, and as I DM I hated my spells just getting knocked down all the time.

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

Exactly my experience too. In my first 5e game I just told the players what the enemy was casting, but by the time the party hit tier 3, I implemented the Xanathar's rule because counterspell had become such an obvious powerhouse. It's a really fun spell for players, but it's also too good at higher levels, in my opinion.

However, after playing with the Xanathar's rule for quite some time, I'm not a huge fan of it. It creates situations where the players are discussing who's willing to spend the reaction so that the character with the counterspell could maybe try countering, plus you need to roll an extra check, which takes a moment too. I have a house rule to help alleviate the lost action/turn when a player character is counterspelled, but I'm considering implementing something else in place of the Xanathar identification rule.

 

[auburn2]

So I have found it is more or less impossible to use counterspell and identify spell as written. When it gets to the BBEG's turn it is far easier to say he casts a fireball, at which point wizard will come up and say "I counterspell him". I know this makes the spell decidedly more powerful.

The only way to not do this is to break up BBEGs turn into two parts - he starts casting do you want to counterspell, no ok he finishes casting and a big ball fire erupts around you. This gets very clunky when used over and over again every turn.

On the flip side if the BBEG has counterspell I would find it pretty difficult to use logic to determine if they would use it. It is the same kind of thing - Lich sees cleric start casting bless, decides not to counterspell and saves reaction and slot. So I play it the same for the bad guys, they know the spell and decide whether or not to counter.

Thematically this is magic, so they don't actually know the spell ahead of time but by having counterspell prepared they are connected to the weave and get a compelling idea of whether they should cast it. If the PC chooses to cast it after they hear the spell, it is not because they knew what the spell was but because it was prepared and they felt the need to cast it. So although in gameplay it is BBEG casts fireball, PC counterspells, thematically it is BBEG starts casting and based on the disturbance in the weave you feel you should counterspell, PC counterspells, whew it was a fireball.

 

[Gadget]

The problem with 3e/3.5e counterspelling is that it was clunky, risky (you either had to know the exact spell they were going to cast OR try your luck with a dispell magic) and took up so much action economy (you had to use your action to ready the counterspell) that I never saw it used (And that's from playing from nearly the day 3e came out DMing weekly sessions with multiple spellcasters).

It was too far on the other end!

And I'm fine with that because, quite frankly, there really is not need it. I don't remember groups of gamers clamoring for it. It just seems...kind of superfluous, as well as opening up a whole knew can of worms. Might as well bring back psonic combat (I kid, but only slightly).

 

[dave2008]

And I'm fine with that because, quite frankly, there really is not need it. I don't remember groups of gamers clamoring for it. It just seems...kind of superfluous, as well as opening up a whole knew can of worms. Might as well bring back psonic combat (I kid, but only slightly).

IDK, I think the wizard duel is a bit iconic and, IMO, counterspell is part of that. I don't remember who it was, but if your familiar with Harry Potter someone on these boards described counterspells like the duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort in Order of the Phoenix.

 

[cbwjm]

IDK, I think the wizard duel is a bit iconic and, IMO, counterspell is part of that. I don't remember who it was, but if your familiar with Harry Potter someone on these boards described counterspells like the duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort in Order of the Phoenix.

That's how I like to think of them, it's also why I want to make the spell always need a roll so that the outcome is never sure and it provides a bit more suspense.

 

[Nod_Hero]

I know the RAW method. I have house ruled it slightly. If it is on their spell list and of a level they could theoretically cast, the character can attempt an Arcana check without advantage, but not using their reaction. If they fail this check, I give them a false answer, rather than tell them they aren't sure. If they are making that much of a snap judgement, they take their chances.

Oh, yeah. Yoink.

I also will be partaking of the Yoink on this...

 

[jasper]

ORIGINAL: What was the problem with it? It's rather easy for a caster to avoid, and i...

• Range is only 60', many spells are longer than that.
• If you can't observe the casting you can't counterspell it. Subtle metamagic is an easy one. Invisibility works if there are no verbal components.
• Move out of line-of-site, Ready a spell (which explicitly casts it) to trigger when you can see a foe, move back. This also uses their reaction, so they can't Counterspell back.
• A caster only has a single reaction per round. If you have multiple casters on your side, use this. Will they disable an earlier spell and let you unleash a big one, or not in which case use a lesser spell. Or if they use reaction for Shield, Absorb Elements, Hellish Rebuke or something else.
• A caster only has a set number of slots - run them down. This works best against PCs, since foe casters usually only have a single combat a day to worry about.

But But that is too hard to do. Counterspelling nerfs my monsters. And I will argue this until I am Blue in the face.

 

[jasper]

A lot of my fights were in dungeon / room scenarios, so getting out of range was often not an option.

and the tactics was part of the issue, I was tired of having all of my caster fights having to use the same tricks over and over because of one spell.

Lots and lots of cardboard boxes. Hide your wizard in them. It worked for Snake Plissken. So much they made 7 to 100 video games of this.