So is it official now? Counterspelling

[The Crimson Binome]

This allows any rule to be ignored in AL, then. That seems to go against the spirit of AL. If a DM wants to say daggers do 10d20 damage because of his interpretation, that'd be cool, right?

No, because the rule for how much damage a dagger deals is clearly stated, in ways that the rules for counterspelling (and stealth, and many others) are not. The DM in an AL game is obliged to follow the rules in the book, but where those rules are left up to interpretation, the DM still has the same freedom to interpret as they would at any other table.

Fifth Edition is not written to the same degree of precision that 3E or 4E were. There are places where the DM is forced to make a judgment call, or else there's no way to move forward. This is one of those places.

 

[Lanefan]

I thought so originally. But if you picture it as the counterspell trying to interfere with your shaping of the weave, and your counter of that as modifying the casting of your spell to counter that it makes more sense. It might look similar to the Harry Potter battles.

That's certainly one way of looking at it.

I guess it boils down to how much concentration/focus/trance is required in the fiction to cast the original spell and thus whether said caster is - or even could be - aware of a counterspell attempt.

My original thought was also, “how often does this really come up?” But then I realized that people who play MtG probably would think of it/use it.

What makes me really shudder is the thought of there not just being two casters involved, but three or four or eight all flinging counterspells at each other.

If the rule for resolution sequence was first-in first-out (for spells of the same "type" e.g. bonus as a type, reaction as a type, etc.) this would never be a problem*, but they foolishly went and made it last-in first-out; so it's headaches all round.

* - and as a side effect this would mean a reaction spell - including counterspell - could not itself be countered. Way more intuitive, and also way simpler to adjudicate.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

That's certainly one way of looking at it.

I guess it boils down to how much concentration/focus/trance is required in the fiction to cast the original spell and thus whether said caster is - or even could be - aware of a counterspell attempt.

What makes me really shudder is the thought of there not just being two casters involved, but three or four or eight all flinging counterspells at each other.

If the rule for resolution sequence was first-in first-out (for spells of the same "type" e.g. bonus as a type, reaction as a type, etc.) this would never be a problem*, but they foolishly went and made it last-in first-out; so it's headaches all round.

* - and as a side effect this would mean a reaction spell - including counterspell - could not itself be countered. Way more intuitive, and also way simpler to adjudicate.

From a mass market game, I get the concern. But it doesn’t bother me unless it actually comes up in our game, and if there was a multi-caster counterspell I could see it as similar to a number of scenes in movies. So we might go with it. Mostly because the only time I could think of something like that occurring is when it’s REALLY important that a particular spell is cast.

But counterspell comes up so infrequently, much less counter-counterspells it’s really just one of those rules that’s more a thought exercise than a rule I really care about.

Based on the comments from the designers it seems quite intentional. The only thing I typically see missing from the discussion regarding whether or not you know what the spell is, is the fact that Passive Arcana is a thing based on the rules. Using that against the casters Spell Save DC is all you need the address that. If you want, you could give advantage if it’s a spell you know.

 

[Markh3rd]

It never use to come up until the Acquisition Inc game where Chris Perkins allowed it. Then suddenly counterspelling counterspell while casting a fireball became a thing. I see alot more of it now. I just let the players decide the first time it comes up. And then the sword swings both ways from then on. But that's me, and I see it flip flop from table to table as allowed or not, that's why I asked here. You guys always bring good points up I missed or misread.