Taking care of magic users...

[BriarMonkey]

As for the task at hand, I strongly believe that counterspelling (locking down the opponent spellslinger) should be an available tactical option, but it should be a choice. You never want something to be such that it is always a default option. The caster should be able to decide - do you clear out some of the opponent's forces, or do you try to prevent the opponent caster from clearing out some of your forces?

I do think that the current mechanic, where only the same spell can be used to counter (with a couple exceptions) is far too narrow. That means that realistically, the tactical option isn't available. (I've never seen anyone counterspell, in any version of the game, at any of my tables.)

However, I absolutely do not think that the option should be made "easier", with regards to always being allowed to do it. Just off the top of my head, it might be allowable to create a spell for each spell level that is specifically a counterspelling spell. This removes the need for a specific match, but still requires that the caster has prepared (or knows) the spell. This then puts choice back into the mix with regards to spell load outs (and future tactical decisions).

But, there are the counterspelling feats that grant additional latitude, at the price of using higher level spell slots...

Having said that though, this is still something I'd want to play test a lot. You want to strike a balance and still allow for meaningful decisions.

 

[Pielorinho]

Counterspelling is almost never worthwhile, because you're trading an almost certain opportunity to do something for an opportunity to maybe prevent an enemy from taking a turn. It's sort of the equivalent of a fighter going full defense against a melee attack: how often do you see that happen, either?

There is, however, an excellent counterspell option already in the rules. It's called by many names. One of the most common names is readied-action Fireball . Readied-action fog cloud works pretty well, too, in most cases.

 

[gamerprinter]

Counterspelling is almost never worthwhile, because you're trading an almost certain opportunity to do something for an opportunity to maybe prevent an enemy from taking a turn. It's sort of the equivalent of a fighter going full defense against a melee attack: how often do you see that happen, either?

There is, however, an excellent counterspell option already in the rules. It's called by many names. One of the most common names is readied-action Fireball . Readied-action fog cloud works pretty well, too, in most cases.

Yeah, to me counterspelling is like parrying blows with your shield (fighting defensively) and not attacking. Sure a counterspell and a block can prevent injury to you, but reacting to others actions means never winning, never taking lead.

I would rather spend my attentions causing damage to opponents through spells and attacks rather than responding to attacks against me. It's a waste of energy otherwise. It makes you a follower and not a leader.

You can never win at chess, unless your on the offensive. Same is true for D&D/PF.

Trust your Saving throws, Spell Resistance, AC, DR, and HP - that's the only defenses you really need to worry about - actively defending is a waste of time.

 

[Gansk]

I would like to playtest the following to see if it would encourage spell dueling with counterspells:

1) No more ready actions, unless the trigger condition is actual movement
Example: If he moves toward me, I blast him with a fireball.

2) Counterspell is now a standard action, but you can counterspell at any point in the spell's duration. You need to identify the spell with Spellcraft, then cast the exact same spell (or the reverse spell can work in some cases). Spells with instantaneous durations cannot be counterspelled.

3) If you can't meet the requirements above, you can always cast Dispel Magic and attempt the caster level check.

 

[Squire James]

Take Leadership, then give your gnome cohort a Wand of Dispel Magic. Use a kobold instead if your campaign hates gnomes. Standing orders "Do nothing but ready this wand to dispel any dangerous-looking spell that heads for us!"

It's like whole-party Spell Resistance, except only for 1 spell per round unless you have more gnomes and wands...

 

[Mad Hamish]

Counterspelling is almost never worthwhile, because you're trading an almost certain opportunity to do something for an opportunity to maybe prevent an enemy from taking a turn. It's sort of the equivalent of a fighter going full defense against a melee attack: how often do you see that happen, either?

You're operating as part of a group though.

How effective it is really depends on what you're up against and how likely it is to work. If you're negating either a greater power than you are or the opposition's main strength it can be well worthwhile sacrificing a spellcaster's actions and letting the melee classes kick through without being threatened by magic.

If you can stop the lich-king hitting your team with spells then your fighters should be able to cut him down.

If the kobold shamans can stop the clerics and wizards from getting spells off then their scattered minions can focus fire to try and take people down.

 

[steenan]

Why not just remove the readied action requirement for counterspelling and allow doing it once per round as an AoO-equivalent?

It would make counterspells much more useful tactical option, without spellcasters completely locking each other (as one still needs either the same spell or a dispel check). It also has a side effect of encouraging use of uncommon spells, as the enemy is less likely to have a counter for them.

 

[billd91]

Why not just remove the readied action requirement for counterspelling and allow doing it once per round as an AoO-equivalent?

It would make counterspells much more useful tactical option, without spellcasters completely locking each other (as one still needs either the same spell or a dispel check). It also has a side effect of encouraging use of uncommon spells, as the enemy is less likely to have a counter for them.

That might be too easy on the counter-speller. I think dumping an action to it out of turn is fine but I think making it essentially free is giving away way too much. I'd consider at least charging an immediate action for it, and even that is very good on the exchange.