Eldritch counter-blast?

[frankthedm]

By the logic spouted above, it would also be impossible to use a SLA Haste to counterspell a Slow spell because it is a variant of counterspelling.

Correct. There is no prevention of the dispel feature haste and slow have on one another however.

Haste
Transmutation
Level: Brd 3, Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Targets: One creature/level, no two of which can be more than 30 ft. apart
Duration: 1 round/level
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)

The transmuted creatures move and act more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects.

When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding. The attack is made using the creature’s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can’t use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.)

A hasted creature gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and Reflex saves. Any condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses.

All of the hasted creature’s modes of movement (including land movement, burrow, climb, fly, and swim) increase by 30 feet, to a maximum of twice the subject’s normal speed using that form of movement. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus, and it affects the creature’s jumping distance as normal for increased speed.

Multiple haste effects don’t stack. Haste dispels and counters slow.

Material Component: A shaving of licorice root.

If you use Dispel magic to counterspell someone else's Dispel Magic, do you roll the caster check or have it automatically succeed?

The one who is trying to counterspell chooses.

 

[Infiniti2000]

By the logic spouted above, it would also be impossible to use a SLA Haste to counterspell a Slow spell because it is a variant of counterspelling.

That's impossible in any case. You can't use haste to counterspell (sans a special counterspelling ability) a slow. You can, however, use it to dispel the slow, regardless of Spell, SPA, or even presumably Su ability.

If you use Dispel magic to counterspell someone else's Dispel Magic, do you roll the caster check or have it automatically succeed?

I suppose you could do as frank suggests, but obviously you would choose to automatically counterspell it. After all, you are using the same spell.

I will point this out, though, in your favor. Counterspelling is a weak tactic for the most part so allowing a dispel magic SPA or SU to counterspell is probably not a problem. The one concern I have would be those with "at will" greater dispel magic, remaining invisible and nullifying the party mage whilst his comrades beat the crap out of him.

 

[AuraSeer]

Infiniti2000, could you explain your reasoning? I don't see why the rule covering a whole class of effects (all spell-like abilities) is more specific than one covering a single, individual effect (dispel magic).

 

[Infiniti2000]

The spell-like abilities section contains a few sentences containing rules and then the key sentence: "In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell. . ."

Referring to the spell description is the adjunct to the previous rules statements. Namely, "Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled." That's the rule for spell-like abilities. The SPA is only like the spell "in all other ways." We do the same thing for components, right? Do you require components when a planetar uses dispel magic as a SPA? After all, the fact that dispel magic requires V, S components is a specific case, is it not? What's the casting time on a SPA dominate person?

 

[kigmatzomat]

That's impossible in any case. You can't use haste to counterspell (sans a special counterspelling ability) a slow.

Actually, by the SRD, that is a subclass of counterspelling noted in the same section as using Dispel Magic as a subclass of counterspelling.

COUNTERSPELLS

It is possible to cast any spell as a counterspell. By doing so, you are using the spell’s energy to disrupt the casting of the same spell by another character. Counterspelling works even if one spell is divine and the other arcane.

How Counterspells Work: To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of the counterspell. You do this by choosing the ready action. In doing so, you elect to wait to complete your action until your opponent tries to cast a spell. (You may still move your speed, since ready is a standard action.)

If the target of your counterspell tries to cast a spell, make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell’s level). This check is a free action. If the check succeeds, you correctly identify the opponent’s spell and can attempt to counter it. If the check fails, you can’t do either of these things.

To complete the action, you must then cast the correct spell. As a general rule, a spell can only counter itself. If you are able to cast the same spell and you have it prepared (if you prepare spells), you cast it, altering it slightly to create a counterspell effect. If the target is within range, both spells automatically negate each other with no other results.

Counterspelling Metamagic Spells: Metamagic feats are not taken into account when determining whether a spell can be countered

Specific Exceptions: Some spells specifically counter each other, especially when they have diametrically opposed effects.

Dispel Magic as a Counterspell: You can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, and you don’t need to identify the spell he or she is casting. However, dispel magic doesn’t always work as a counterspell (see the spell description).

Part of the reason it is a counter spell is that if you were slowed and then hasted you would be unable to be affected by eitherhaste and slow until their respective durations expired since you are affected by a single spell once no matter how many castings are in effect. Since they counter each each other, the durations end and you can again be affected by the spell.

My interpretation of the rules are that SLA dispel magic cannot be used in a "true" counterspell of a normal Dispel Magic that would work 100% of the time just as an SLA slow cannot counter a normal slow.

I believe that the "SLAs may not counterspell" only applies to the "true" counterspelling, not the subclasses. The fact that the Dispel Magic special case does not require the normal spellcraft check to identify the spell being cast further distances it from the standard rules on counterspelling.

This means that an SLA Dispel Magic can be used according to the spell's description to make a caster check to counter another spell and that a SLA slow can counter a normal Haste.

If you don't agree to to the "subclass" clause, then you believe that an SLA dispel magic cannot make a caster check to counter any spell being cast and that an SLA slow may provide the opposite effect of haste, essentially negating it, but that both the SLA slow and haste remain in effect.

 

[Infiniti2000]

If you don't agree to to the "subclass" clause, then you believe that an SLA dispel magic cannot make a caster check to counter any spell being cast and that an SLA slow may provide the opposite effect of haste, essentially negating it, but that both the SLA slow and haste remain in effect.

Agree with the first part, disagree with the second.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Why? Both are spell-specific variants of counter spelling by the RAW.

Dispel lets you counter any spell via a caster check (not 100% effective)
Haste lets you counter slow (100% effective but only one spell)
Slow lets you counter haste (ditto)

If you disallow the SLA Dispel Magic's specific form of counter spell why allow Haste, Slow, etc?

 

[Infiniti2000]

Why? Both are spell-specific variants of counter spelling by the RAW.

No, they're not. Dispel Magic explicitly uses the counterspelling rules. Slow/Haste explicitly does not. You cannot, for example, ready to counterspell and upon seeing that your opponent is casting haste, counterspell it with slow.

Instead, you wait until your opponent has haste in effect and then you try to affect your opponent(s) with slow, to "dispel and counter" it. Not the same thing at all.

Your point on dispel magic is a pretty good one. I don't agree, but I don't think it's crazy either. More importantly, I don't think it would ruin the game at all by allowing it. It's obviously far better for bad guys (especially those with invisibility and lots of minions) since PCs are very unlikely to get DM or GDM as a spell-like ability.

So, is there some new point to bring up or can we agree to disagree?

 

[Tiberius]

No, they're not. Dispel Magic explicitly uses the counterspelling rules. Slow/Haste explicitly does not. You cannot, for example, ready to counterspell and upon seeing that your opponent is casting haste, counterspell it with slow.

Actually, you can.

Counterspells
...
Some spells specifically counter each other, especially when they have diametrically opposed effects.

Haste dispels and counters slow.

Slow has a similar phrase. Dispelling a spell and countering a spell are two distinct effects; why, then, would the spell description mention both if it were not capable of doing both? Now, ordinarily, one uses Slow to dispel a Haste already in effect. It is possible, however rarely used, to cast Slow as a counterspell against either Slow or Haste.

As a note, I agree with those who say no counterspells with SLA.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Thanks Tiberius. I think the reason that Haste & Slow were not specifically called out is that list of spells that would counter eachother via diametric effect was too long to bother listing and it would be impossible to have a complete list.

Dispel Magic's availability to most spell casters as a catch-all mechanism is worth noting.

Barring a couple of the designers deigning to clarify, I believe both are valid, if mutually exclusive, understandings of the text. Mine boils down to "the unique counterspelling rules of individual spells supercede the more general rules against SLAs counterspelling." The opposite is "the SLA rule supercedes all forms of counterspelling." I wouldn't argue with a DM who held the opposite interpretation I did, as long as he applied it universally and consistently.