Does a Ring of Counterspells work on area spells?

[kreynolds]

RC's interpretation sounds quite reasonable to me, since "cast upon the wearer" isn't 3E jargon the way "targeted spell" is.

Don't you think that the example I gave above seems a bit odd? It seems pretty odd to me, and generally, when something looks that fishy, it's probably because it doesn't work that way.

I realize that "cast upon the wearer" isn't as strong as "targeted spell", but in the case of this ring, I believe the former means the same thing as the later, i.e. targeted spells. Maybe it is supposed to work that way, but it just looks really wierd when put into perspective.

Kreynolds! Bad troll! No biscuit for you.

Not trolling. Just point out the flaw in allow a Web spell to be bounced back by the ring.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Isn't there a villain in one of the official modules or Queen of Lies (by Monte, and therefore fairly official) that has a ring of counterspells with fireball loaded into it?

 

[hong]

Not trolling. Just point out the flaw in allow a Web spell to be bounced back by the ring.

D00d, that's the ring of spell turning you're thinking of. Spell turning bounces the spell back at the caster. Counterspelling doesn't.

 

[kreynolds]

D00d, that's the ring of spell turning you're thinking of. Spell turning bounces the spell back at the caster. Counterspelling doesn't.

LOL

 

[Iku Rex]

The item description is unclear, but since it's based on spell turning I would think it only works against targeted spells.

 

[noretoc]

I think a one shot counter of a spell, costing 4000 GP is fair. It can only be used once before needing to be recharged. Limiting the spells that would be countered to thoes targeting the user lmits the ring even more than it should be. Also by the text, I have to agree that the way it is written means that is will counter the fireball. Wizards (TM) does tend to use "jargon" when they want to be specific. I think if they meant targeted they would have used the word.