Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BriarMonkey" data-source="post: 5818012" data-attributes="member: 95387">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.</blockquote>

Verification