D&D (2024) Is Counterspell less frustrating now?

[jerryrice4949]

I likely won't play through BG3 without both being provided by my party.

I'm dismayed at the counterspell hate.

I think it's a great tool. (UU Forever!)

I like Counterspell too and it adds to the flavor of the game. When you think of great magic duels you cannot help think of a great wizard’s ability to preempt or counter the mage they are battling.

People are weird about this spell but it is cool and adds an element of strategy.

 

[Stalker0]

Also, spell lists don’t apply to NPCs. You can give them whatever spells you want.

Again though this is the common argument I see with counterspell, people wanting to "adjust" the game for this one spell. Oh you should make your monsters X way because of counterspell.

Always make sure your fights are greater than 60 feet.....because of counterspell.

Why does this one spell get to dictate so much of the game?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Again though this is the common argument I see with counterspell, people wanting to "adjust" the game for this one spell. Oh you should make your monsters X way because of counterspell.

Always make sure your fights are greater than 60 feet.....because of counterspell.

Why does this one spell get to dictate so much of the game?

Tbh, I don’t care? Like not that I don’t care that it bothers you, I get that and it sucks. I just don’t care that Counterspell has an impact on the game.

At most, it’s an argument for making it part of the Spellcasting rules rather than being a spell itself.

It, dispel magic, dietect magic, and identify, should all be packaged in skills or in the general rules for Spellcasting,

Heck in my games you have a “Spellcasting Check Bonus”, which is what you use for all those functions, and it’s fantastic. Being trained in the appropriate magic skill (Arcana, Nature, Religion) can give advantage on some Spellcasting checks particularly detect and identify checks), and the Spellcasting (or pact magic) feature allows you to do the more active checks, which can also benefit from spending spell slots.

But we ran counter and dispel RAW for most of the last decade, and it’s never been an issue.

Regardless of whether anyone has it prepared, we build Spellcasting enemies to have resources other than spells and spells that use multiple action types, legendary enemies can generally spend an extra LA to cast a leveled spell as an LA (so 1 for a cantrip and 2 for a leveled spell), NPCs have things PCs can’t gain from their class like an Arcane Mirror that has a chance to throw a spell back at its caster, etc, because the game RAW just doesn’t build monsters and encounters well, and challenging spellcasters is part of that.

But we don’t always even have anyone with Counterspell in the party.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Lol we need an anti-symmetrical game design league or something.

Even 4e only looked symmetrical at a glance. As someone pointed out recently, wizards had encounter changing dailies and okay encounter powers, while fighters had okay dailies and really wicked encounter powers. The game was full of dynamics like that.

5e is more loosely designed, but aims for the same thing. Basically balanced but definitely not symmetrically.

And the game is better for it.

I like Counterspell too and it adds to the flavor of the game. When you think of great magic duels you cannot help think of a great wizard’s ability to preempt or counter the mage they are battling.

People are weird about this spell but it is cool and adds an element of strategy.

Exactly. I want more spells that counter other casters in different ways, not less.

 

[Nightfly]

(conversely with dumb-as-rocks players it's fine).

I'm extremely stupid and so are all my friends, so that's a big relief.

 

[Clint_L]

Again though this is the common argument I see with counterspell, people wanting to "adjust" the game for this one spell. Oh you should make your monsters X way because of counterspell.

Always make sure your fights are greater than 60 feet.....because of counterspell.

Why does this one spell get to dictate so much of the game?

It doesn’t. I like counterspell and don’t worry about it at all when designing encounters. Somehow the game survives just fine.

Healing word warps the game exponentially more than counterspell, yet it is making it through unscathed. As will counterspell once WotC sees the feedback.

 

[Sulicius]

I hope the new counterspell sticks. I hardly ever use spellcasters in combats because I only use monsters that fit the situation and the setting.

I think I have only used counterspell on one monster in the last year, because I don’t want to waste people’s time. There is nothing tactical about counterspell, since it is too good in every situation. Taking away a turn of spellcasting usually comes down to making something dramatic NOT happen in a fight.

CS can burn for all I care.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It was changed just to give boss monsters with Legendary Resistance a chance... when the problem is that it exists at all.

IMO the problem is that it isn’t built into the games general rules.

From the powergamer perspective, counterspell is great. If a few people in the party have it and use it every round, you can just stop the DM from ever using casters. For anyone who thinks it's just fine, just watch the climactic final battle of the first season of Critical Role.

Yeah that fight is awesome!

I feel like people who think it's fine either don't face enemies with spellcasting that often, so i doesn't get used much, or they purposefully hold off on using to shut down enemies in order to play nice with the DM.

Nope, we just either have DMs that plan for thier PCs, or plan for the general types of PCs, or we are DMs who do so.

If a DM has made a custom statblock (and yes I do think all experienced DMs should, because 5e sucks at monsters) with legendary actions, this should not be an issue. It should be effective, just like picking the right elemental damage or any other game changer spell, but it shouldn’t be ending the encounter. That’s a problem of monster and encounter design and lack of DM guidance, not a problem with any of the “game changer” spells.

 

[Clint_L]

I hope the new counterspell sticks. I hardly ever use spellcasters in combats because I only use monsters that fit the situation and the setting.

I think I have only used counterspell on one monster in the last year, because I don’t want to waste people’s time. There is nothing tactical about counterspell, since it is too good in every situation. Taking away a turn of spellcasting usually comes down to making something dramatic NOT happen in a fight.

Totally disagree. Players love using counterspell successfully. It is always a high five moment at the table, and as the DM I play it up big time as the baddie gets foiled. I'll also point out that, as previously alluded to, arguably the most famous dramatic moment in actual play history hinges upon a player choosing to upcast counterspell to 9th level, with hugely impactful consequences that all still being felt to this day in the plot of Critical Role.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Totally disagree. Players love using counterspell successfully. It is always a high five moment at the table, and as the DM I play it up big time as the baddie gets foiled. I'll also point out that, as previously alluded to, arguably the most famous dramatic moment in actual play history things upon a players choosing to upcast counterspell to 9th level, with hugely impactful consequences that all still being felt to this day in the plot of Critical Role.

Was not that the event that allowed Arkhan the cruel to get the Hand and Eye of Vecna?