The Negator; the Spell-Breaker; The Mage-Slayer...

[Crazy Jerome]

However, the spell or effect being countered has to factor into the check too as well - I'm not comfortable with a 1st level wizard countering an opposing Meteor Storm with a straight up Int vs. Int check. There should probably also be spell slots involved or it becomes too advantageous to shut a spellcaster down while not losing your own spells (if it's an immediate action, there's no reason NOT to do it).

...

For martial characters grappling and/or some sort of "disruptive strike" ought to handle the same precept. You attack on your turn, but the spell disruption effects happen on the target's turn - so it's a delay/interrupt that isn't.

Well, the part that I was least sure of, and thus left vague, was the numbers in the check. However they are set, I think it should favor the caster (all other things being equal). I was going to say have it as:

• Counterspeller wins check by five or more, takes spell (next round unless stopped).
• Counterspeller ties or worse, caster casts as normal.
• In between, locked in struggle over the spell.

But you could also give the caster a bonus to their check equal to the spell level, then do the above. The flavor here is that high level spells are so powerful that they are very hard to disrupt, once started, and even more difficult to take over. The higher the spell, the less valid the tactic. So spellcasters of all levels can interfere with magic missiles, webs, etc., but higher levels ones are hard to stop when serious.

For non-casters, I was also thinking that "slippery hand grenade" effect woud be in place, except that a non-caster can't take over the spell. If they get a "locked in struggle" result, they've simply slowed the caster down for a round. If they actually get a "take over" result, they've disrupted the spell, but it may go off. Here's where an optional wild magic system could be fun.

The presence of serious counter spelling in the rules, however done, says to me that magic, especially powerful magic, is something that you don't disrupt lightly.

 

[nomotog]

Bear in mind that an NPC's daily-use spell and a player's are not equivalent resources. The NPC is only going to have one encounter. Ever.

If burning one of your spells to prevent the consequences of an enemy spell is better than using that spell to do what it was designed to do, then that means you're fighting enemies with more dangerous spells than yours, which means you're either in over your head or you have the wrong spells for the situation.

I'd prefer to have countering be an Int (Arcana) or Wis (Divine) contest that doesn't cost a spell but does use up your next action.

You could make it so that counter spells have a little extra bonus in addition to countering the spell. To steal an idea from a magic card, you could have a spell that blocks a summons and allows you to summon your own.

 

[Stormonu]

• Counterspeller wins check by five or more, takes spell (next round unless stopped).

I'd be very careful in this regard. While it is kind of a neat idea, I don't want it abused with players waiting until an enemy starts casting, snag the spell and start using for themselves - while never expending their own spell slots; basically getting spells for free. Countering has to have some cost and real risk involved to make it useable, but not overwhelmingly good.


My desire would be that either counterspelling costs a spell slot to initiate, or if the counterspell wins and seizes the spell, they have to expend an equal level slot to "recast" the enemy spell - else it simply vaporizes and is lost.

For non-casters, I was also thinking that "slippery hand grenade" effect woud be in place, except that a non-caster can't take over the spell. If they get a "locked in struggle" result, they've simply slowed the caster down for a round. If they actually get a "take over" result, they've disrupted the spell, but it may go off. Here's where an optional wild magic system could be fun.

The presence of serious counter spelling in the rules, however done, says to me that magic, especially powerful magic, is something that you don't disrupt lightly.

If "locked in struggle" is presented as the spellcaster having to start the spell over or halted midcasting without somehow losing the spell, that should work. "Take over" should probably just cause the spell to fizzle or you run the risk of above that the winner sort of gets a free spell. The benefit should be in stopping the enemy from advancing his agenda, not also powering yourself up. Though I could see a special ability/feat/whatever for a martial character to cause the spell to backfire, rewire it for the counterer's benefit or (in the case of a Spellthief) steal the spell for themselves - in such cases this having some sort of limit so it doesn't get out of hand (maybe the counterer can absorb/affect so many spell levels or do it so many times a day). I'm not much for a Wild Magic result - that sounds like a punishment for a successful countering of a spellcaster's ability.

 

[Kavon]

I just had a mental image of two spellcasters playing a tennis match by continually throwing a fireball back and forth.


I think either way can work. Either have it take up one of your spell slots to reflect the spell back, or have it be free and potentially get D&D Wimbledon if that's your ballgame.
I'm assuming the 'core' would be the simple way - no counterspelling. Anything else depends on how you want it, right?

 

[ren1999]

I'm purposing something similar as an out of turn reaction. You get only 1 reaction from 1st to 20th level and you have to trade a standard action during your turn for it.

Dispel Magic
abjuration/reaction/class lvl 3/int vs int(spell) or vs wis(prayer)/You forsee a successful spell or prayer cast on yourself or an ally during combat. You negate the spell or prayer.

Deflect Magic
abjuration/reaction/class lvl 4/int vs int(spell) or vs wis(prayer)/You forsee a successful spell or prayer cast on yourself or an ally during combat. You send the spell or prayer back on the caster.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I would rather see counter spell as a defense booster instead of negating the attack. So perhaps the Mage can use an action to provide allies a boost to defense against a school of magic or keywords. An ability tree could expand the range and effectiveness. Possibly even include a reactive attack on the caster if the attack is countered by the warding.

This would make counterspelling an option that could turn an encounter..but is a guessing game or knowledge check to counter a specific bad guys attacks.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2