Question about counterspelling

[eris404]

Hey all,

Like subject line says, I would like clarification on counterspelling (I didn't see anything on Wizards's site that addresses this, so if you have a link or publication citation I could look at please let me know). For the record, we're using 3.0 rules.

Can only cast spells be counterspelled? That is, could a spell read from a scroll or a "spell effect" from a wand or staff be counterspelled? Also, would a spell effect from a wand, staff or scroll trigger a Dispel Magic spell contained in a Ring of Counterspells? My guess (based on the strict intrepretation of the text in the 3.0 Player's Handbook) is no, but a character's life might depend on it, so I thought I'd check here.

Thanks!

 

[Magic Slim]

We've always played it that you can counterspell a spell from any source (ie caster, scroll, wand, staff, etc.) BY any source (idem), so a caster with a wand of fireballs can counterspell the opposing wizard's scribed fireball.

I hope we're playing it right!

Slim

 

[welby]

I agree with Slim's way of running things.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

We've always played it that you can counterspell a spell from any source (ie caster, scroll, wand, staff, etc.) BY any source (idem), so a caster with a wand of fireballs can counterspell the opposing wizard's scribed fireball.

I hope we're playing it right!

Slim

While I fully agree with this method of running counterspells, I have to point out (since this is the 'rules' forum, not house rules) that this is actually against the rules in 3.0.

Most magic items are 'activation' or 'constant', i.e. triggered or persistent. Neither of these is allowed to be counterspelled under 3.0 counterspelling, which requires correct identification of the spell as well as the appropriate counterspell.

Dispel Magic is arguable within this context, as counterspell rules don't clarify it correctly, forcing GM's to make house rulings regarding the mess.


That said - I agree with Slim, if a player has appropriately readied their action to counterspell, can identify the spell being cast via SpellCraft (which said skill again implies it only works against a spell being cast, not triggered, when used for counterspelling, and again it's only implied, not stated), and has the appropriate spell handy to counter with - let 'em counter it. Now, if they fail their spellcraft check and/or they choose to use dispel magic, then it goes into a different direction.


Quite frankly, after 2-3 years of 3.0 and our recent shift to 3.5 - I've never even seen a PC ask about counterspelling So I've an unwritten house rule that states 'no counterspelling' thereby avoiding the messiness.

 

[Magic Slim]

Of course, you can only counterspell a spell when it is cast.

Adding to this, I wouldn't have let someone counterspell when his nemesis tries to activate his ring of invisibility (for example). Scrolls, Wands and Staves are basically "spells for later"...

I agree that according to the strict wording of the 3.0 rules, I'm not sure it's possible to counsterspell anything else, using anything else than an actual, cast, spell.

Slim

 

[eris404]

Thanks for the replies so far. Here's the exact situation, which may help clarify my question. The character was subject to four attacks (from four different foes) from wands of some sort that dealt 108 hp of acid damage total. Because the character had only 81 hp, she was quite sincerely dead. However, the character had a ring of counterspells in which she had cast Dispel Magic. The description of the item from SRD3.0 is:

"This ring allows a single spell of 1st through 6th level to be cast into it. Should that spell ever be cast upon the wearer, the spell is immediately countered, as a counterspell action, requiring no action (or even knowledge) on the wearer’s part. Once so used, the spell cast within the ring is gone. A new spell (or the same one as before) may be placed in it again."

If one of the attacks could be counterspelled by this ring, then she would not take damage from one of the attacks and still be alive. However, from the strict interpretation of the description above, I'm guessing the attack wouldn't have triggered the Dispel Magic. What say you?

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

Thanks for the replies so far. Here's the exact situation, which may help clarify my question. The character was subject to four attacks (from four different foes) from wands of some sort that dealt 108 hp of acid damage total. Because the character had only 81 hp, she was quite sincerely dead. However, the character had a ring of counterspells in which she had cast Dispel Magic. The description of the item from SRD3.0 is:

"This ring allows a single spell of 1st through 6th level to be cast into it. Should that spell ever be cast upon the wearer, the spell is immediately countered, as a counterspell action, requiring no action (or even knowledge) on the wearer’s part. Once so used, the spell cast within the ring is gone. A new spell (or the same one as before) may be placed in it again."

If one of the attacks could be counterspelled by this ring, then she would not take damage from one of the attacks and still be alive. However, from the strict interpretation of the description above, I'm guessing the attack wouldn't have triggered the Dispel Magic. What say you?

Wow. Awesome question there, I found an answer I never knew existed

SAVING THROWS AGAINST MAGIC ITEM POWERS:

Magic items produce spells or spell-like effects.

and from magic Item Basics:

Wands: A wand is a short stick imbued with the power to cast a specific spell. A newly created wand has 50 charges, and each use of the wand depletes one of those charges.

So, while I would've originally agreed with you, when I hunted up actual references to back me up - guess what I found? We were wrong.

The wands ARE casting spells, and as such, the ring of counterspelling would indeed have triggered, IF the spell the wands were casting had been in the ring then yes. Unfortunately, the spell was dispel magic. That's a handy idea for a mage trying to cast dispel magic at you But it doesn't work for the acid wands.

 

[jgsugden]

This is a peripheral issue to this discussion, but spell-like abilities may not be counterspelled. This rule is found on page 315 of the 3.5 MM. I just thought that people readng this thread might find that interesting.

 

[eris404]

Wow. Awesome question there, I found an answer I never knew existed

Thanks! This was a stumper for our group, since almost no one in our group ever counterspells anything (it just doesn't really ever come up, you know?). I thought it would be a great question to bring up here and get some great answers.

So, while I would've originally agreed with you, when I hunted up actual references to back me up - guess what I found? We were wrong.

The wands ARE casting spells, and as such, the ring of counterspelling would indeed have triggered, IF the spell the wands were casting had been in the ring then yes. Unfortunately, the spell was dispel magic. That's a handy idea for a mage trying to cast dispel magic at you But it doesn't work for the acid wands.

I pretty much figured as much, that either the spell (effect) from the wand wouldn't trigger the ring at all or that the proper spell would be needed. I'm not really sure what spell was in the wand anyway (if was a wand), and no one had the chance to make a spellcraft roll to find out anyway.

Thanks for an insightful answer!

 

[eris404]

This is a peripheral issue to this discussion, but spell-like abilities may not be counterspelled. This rule is found on page 315 of the 3.5 MM. I just thought that people readng this thread might find that interesting.

Off the top of your head, you know if it is the same in 3.0 (that's what we're using)? I didn't find that in the 3.0 SRD, but maybe I'm just not looking in the right place.