Greater Counterspell

[Yair]

Here is a feat I allowed into my game. I hope I didn't make too large a mistake.

Greater Counterspell
You can counterspell effectively.
Requisite: Improved Counterspell
Benefit: If you have not acted in this round yet, and you succesfully identify someone casting a spell, you may counterspell it even though it isn't your turn. Resolve the counterspelling as usual. Your place in the round's sequence doesn't change, and when your turn arrives you may only make a move (equivalent) action.

 

[Goolpsy]

May i suggest calling it: Greater Counterspelling
as it is a feat, something your good at, and not a spell.

looks ok to me, maybe.. for things being easier, say u trade your turn for counterspelling.. i.e max a 5 foot step, and u wont get the *rest* of the turn you already took, at some other time

 

[apesamongus]

That sounds almost identical to Reactive counterspell in Magic of Faerun.

 

[Saeviomagy]

That sounds almost identical to Reactive counterspell in Magic of Faerun.

It's reactive counterspell, except it doesn't require improved initiative, and reactive counterspell sucks up your WHOLE go.

IOW - it's a version of reactive counterspell that might be worth having...

 

[Yair]

Thanks all. I think I'll leave it as is for now, we'll see how it goes.
I considered Couterspelling, but it improves upon Improved Counterspell so losing the "ing" seemed consistent. I'm not a native speaker though, is there a grammer point I'm missing?

I never read that "Reactive Counterspell" feat. It doesn't sound good to me - counterspelling isn't that great, even with both feats. You lose a spell of the same level as the counterspelled one, I don't see why you would need to pay with movement as well. As for Improved Initiative, it works against you "not acted this round yet" so it's a nonsensical requirement.

 

[apesamongus]

I never read that "Reactive Counterspell" feat. It doesn't sound good to me - counterspelling isn't that great, even with both feats. You lose a spell of the same level as the counterspelled one, I don't see why you would need to pay with movement as well. As for Improved Initiative, it works against you "not acted this round yet" so it's a nonsensical requirement.

Well, "not acted this round yet" is a nonsensical requirement anyway.

"The term "round" works like the word "month". A month can mean either a calendar month or a span of time from a day in one month to the same day in the next month. In the same way, a round can be a segment of time starting with the first character to act and ending with the last, but it usually means a span of time from one round to the same initiative count in the next round."

Functionally, there's not really a "round" so much as "my round" or "his round". Saying you haven't acted yet in a round basically means that you have delayed or readied an action, because, otherwise, the round started when you acted. That's why the Reactive Counterspell makes more sense (in that you give up your next action).

And really, you're acting swiftly to do something, so Improved Initiative is a natural requirement. Improved counterspell is the one that seems off to me. A dispell magic counterspeller just blew a feat for nothing.

 

[ARandomGod]

I think I prefer Imp Initiative as a prereq feat instead of Imp Counterspell.

I like how it works however.

 

[Yair]

Well, "not acted this round yet" is a nonsensical requirement anyway.

"The term "round" works like the word "month". A month can mean either a calendar month or a span of time from a day in one month to the same day in the next month. In the same way, a round can be a segment of time starting with the first character to act and ending with the last, but it usually means a span of time from one round to the same initiative count in the next round."

Maybe. In my case, I use the first meaning, not the "usual" meaning.

And really, you're acting swiftly to do something, so Improved Initiative is a natural requirement. Improved counterspell is the one that seems off to me. A dispell magic counterspeller just blew a feat for nothing.

Imprvoed Initiative isn't appropriate since you would need to delay your high initiative to use the feat anyways, making Improved Initiative a totally wasted feat - which I dislike a lot.
I agree it's a waste for a character that emphasises dispell magic counterspelling, but Imp. Init. is a waste for everyone and at least Imp. Counterspelling gives him more options.

Not acted yet in a round does indeed say that you delayed or radied an action. The point of the feat is, essentially, to allow you to delay rather than ready. I am not familiar with Reactive Counterspell, but I was under the impression it does the same.

Thinking about it, requiring Quicken Spell as a prerequisite could make more sense. It would make the feat very hard to get, however.

 

[apesamongus]

Maybe. In my case, I use the first meaning, not the "usual" meaning.

Then, you're building a feat counter to the way any otehr feat or ability works in the game. No other ability works with regards to the first actor-last actor combat round. Everything else works fluidly with the cyclical initiative round (once you get order, that's all that matters, not what the actual numbers originally were)

Not acted yet in a round does indeed say that you delayed or radied an action. The point of the feat is, essentially, to allow you to delay rather than ready. I am not familiar with Reactive Counterspell, but I was under the impression it does the same.

Nope. It requires no delay or ready. You simply sacrifice your next action - If you're currently delayed, then it's your delay action. If you just took an action on your initiative, then it's your next round's action.

Thinking about it, requiring Quicken Spell as a prerequisite could make more sense. It would make the feat very hard to get, however.

Why? What's so hard about a 1 feat prerequisite?