How to do Counterspelling?

[Morrus]

I love the idea of counterspelling (in a dueling mages kinda way), and it's easy enough to come up with an Immediate Interrupt power which attacks Will to block a spell, but it's hard to do this for PCs.

The problem is that monsters and NPCs don't use PC powers, and so you can't link the target of the spell to keywords or a power source. Other than have the DM arbitraily decide when a monster or NPC is using a power that could be counterspelled, can anyone think of another approach?

 

[Dysturbed]

Id say give them a counter action that if works on a diffrent basis than most.
Usually a counter action happens if a character makes a melee attack on something (and misses) you can immediately roll a specific attack to follow it up.

Just change it to be able to interrupt whatever spell a wizard is casting if they are withing a certain area (adjacent or a little more). (he would need to be aware the spell was being cast so close is better than far away)

Probably should have a recharge rate too because this would be really annoying otherwise to the PC's.

 

[Morrus]

Id say give them a counter action that if works on a diffrent basis than most.
Usually a counter action happens if a character makes a melee attack on something (and misses) you can immediately roll a specific attack to follow it up.

Just change it to be able to interrupt whatever spell a wizard is casting if they are withing a certain area (adjacent or a little more). (he would need to be aware the spell was being cast so close is better than far away)

Probably should have a recharge rate too because this would be really annoying otherwise to the PC's.

I think you've misunderstood my question.

The PC has the counterspelling ability, not the monster. The question is how to mechanically identify which monster powers he can use it against, since monster/NPC powers don't have power sources.

 

[Dalamar]

Well, if you don't mind some outlier cases where it doesn't exactly make sense, you could go with "any power targeting Fort, Ref or Will, unless that power also has the Weapon keyword". It does leave out powers that aren't attacks, auras, and such.

Personally, were I to introduce counterspelling, I'd do it exactly with loose definitions. Not to mention that I'd propably not include a blanked "Counter Spell" power.

Really, I'd expand it to be a generic ability to prevent effects, so it'd cover a Fighter cleaving a dragon's breath weapon in twain. Allow people to use their powers to counter, provided it meets certain parameters, and then make sure those powers cover most or all cases where it could come up.

So, a non-Weapon attack against Will can only counter, and be countered by, other similar attacks.
You can only counter a power that is targeting something within the range of the power you're countering with.
Countering a Close or Area power with a Weapon power suffers a penalty if you try to counter the whole effect instead of just its effects on you.
You gain a bonus to countering if you use an encounter power, and an even bigger bonus if it is a daily power.
Fire gains a bonus to countering cold, and vice versa.

 

[Mentat55]

I would go with some sort of loose definition of "magical effects" and let the DM decide by the "eye test" whether a particular attack fell in that bin.

Power sources would be an obvious way to classify things, but they were only applied as keywords to PC powers, and not to monster powers universally.

 

[RangerWickett]

Option 1. Require all monster design to use the 'implement' keyword for spells. (I think this is a bad way to do it.)


Option 2. Make powers that can interrupt any action, and flavor them as a suite of responses, not just a 'counterspell.'

So a PC based on a WotBS inquisitor, for instance, might have an "Inquisitor's Rebuke" power. Immediate interrupt, attack roll, on a hit it does mild damage and causes an opponent's power to deal no damage and have no effect (but doesn't negate any movement), but causes the PC to skip his next standard action.

When used against a monster who is fluffed as 'casting spells,' this represents the inquisitor snuffing his opponent's magic. It's sorta similar when used against a fire-breathing dragon or a mind flayer's psionics. When used against a physical threat like a pouncing jaguar, it represents him slashing with an unholy claw, inflicting an instant of stunning pain which ruins the critter's attack.

Heck, if you want to try something novel, combine it with a mark effect to make the inquisitor an arcane defender. The inquisitor PC can mark an enemy as a minor action, and that -2 penalty on attacks that target anyone other than the inquisitor represent a variety of minor counterspells and disruption. And when necessary he can bust out the (encounter?/daily?) big counter.


You can make a variety of these powers for different styles of defense. A more passive and polite magical defender-leader hybrid might convert the attack's power into a healing surge. A striker might not counter the attack, but could duplicate and reflect it back at the attacker. Etc.

 

[Morrus]

I came up with this, but I'm not particularly happy with it.

 

[keterys]

One idea, things that the Arcana skill can help identify, and powers that are unlikely to be purely physical:
The non-weapon ranged or area attacks of elemental or fey creatures.

 

[Dalamar]

That will give the most accurate results at the cost of some extra work on the DM's part. Not the most elegant solution, but it should give good results at the table.

Now, on the the mechanical part...
1) The power should most definately have the Implement keyword as it is an attack targeting a monster defense
2) Trigger information should, by the normal standards, appear before the Target and Attack lines
3) The Target line should be "The triggering creature", otherwise you can target a creature other than the triggering one
4) I don't think the Miss line is necessary. If you're giving the counterspell ability, you clearly want it to be used, not for it to be something the PC is afraid to use. If you want to keep a penalty, why not make it something like "You grant Combat Advantage against attacks with the Spell keyword until the end of the triggering creature's next turn"? That would be flavourful in that the character has opened themself to the magical energies too much.
5) I'm a bit iffy about the bit regarding specialist counterspellers getting a free at-will out of it. At the least, it should be limited that the at-will must target the triggering creature of the counterspell

 

[Morrus]

That will give the most accurate results at the cost of some extra work on the DM's part. Not the most elegant solution, but it should give good results at the table.

Yeah. It's biggest issue is that it requires prep - it's not pick up and play.

5) I'm a bit iffy about the bit regarding specialist counterspellers getting a free at-will out of it. At the least, it should be limited that the at-will must target the triggering creature of the counterspell

I was dubious about that myself.

This goes with some other alternate rules which have all the old magic schools, and the caster only gets a single at-will power of first level (which is his "signature spell" and must be from his specialist school) - the rest are all dailies.

The reason I put it there is because I wanted the specialist to do something - well, specialist - with the counterspelled energy. Originally I tried giving an alternate small benefit for each school, but couldn't think of enough (what does a Conjurer do with it, for example?), and then figured "Well, their signature spell is themed towards their school by definition, so why not use that?"

Works out to a once-per-encounter possibility of a free level 1 at will being used.

 

[Morrus]

I've amended it with the implement keyword, layout, and a couple of other very minor adjustments (not the big ones like the Miss and the free At-Will though).

 

[Dalamar]

Oh, it most certainly isn't bad when you can only counterspell once per encounter (or even twice per encounter with the paragon feat), it's when you can do it at-will with the epic feat that it starts becoming problematic. At best, you're making a solo with Spells spend its actions for nothing _and_ getting a free use of your at-will out of it.

 

[Morrus]

Oh, it most certainly isn't bad when you can only counterspell once per encounter (or even twice per encounter with the paragon feat), it's when you can do it at-will with the epic feat that it starts becoming problematic. At best, you're making a solo with Spells spend its actions for nothing _and_ getting a free use of your at-will out of it.

That's a thought. The epic feat could negate the miss effect.

 

[Dalamar]

That seems like a good, reasonable solution. Makes a clear improvement in the counterspelling ability of the character, but doesn't make it a solo-stopper entirely.

Now, another thing I noticed is that you have the power noted as a Feature. As of Essentials, WotC themselves seem to be categorizing all powers as either an Attack or Utility (for example, the Mage cantrips), not sure if you want to follow their lead on that.

And since I just like it so damn much myself, might I recommend doublewumpus' power2ool for getting nicely formatted power cards? He's got a whole thread about it here
You can get power cards by hitting the print option and then just copying the pictures from the print page. I added the Counterspell as an attachment.

 

[Morrus]

Now, another thing I noticed is that you have the power noted as a Feature. As of Essentials, WotC themselves seem to be categorizing all powers as either an Attack or Utility (for example, the Mage cantrips), not sure if you want to follow their lead on that.

I'm not worried about what WotC is doing with Essentials - I don't work for WotC.

This is for a new class which works differently to existing 4E classes (there's a hint in the name "Vancian Mage"); the important part is making sure it's balanced and useable, not that it resemble what WotC is doing (which defeats the point of the endeavour!)

 

[Dalamar]

True, but both the Essentials line and the ENPub project aim to evoke old school feel within the 4e framework, so it would be folly to ignore what they're doing.

Plus, personally I think it's just sensible that anything written as a power is either an attack or a utility. But that's just my feeling, I'm not writing the thing.

 

[TarionzCousin]

(there's a hint in the name "Vancian Mage");

Too subtle. What exactly are you getting at here?

 

[Johnnii]

Reflavoring is your friend.

If you're missed by an attack that's described as being magicky, then the player being missed by that attack is free to describe it as counterspelling the effect.

 

[Siberys]

1) I agree with Jonnil

2) Perhaps an immediate interrupt power that let you use an Arcana check in place of a defense would work? Add some feats to improve it or let it cover multiple targets and it could work out for all sorts of counterspelling shenanigans.

 

[the Jester]

How about something like use an ability with keyword x to counter enemy attack with keyword x?